Horizontal Menu Bar

Is Roman Catholicism Biblical??? (=Matt 16:19??)

Is the Roman Catholic Church the True Christian Church??? (=Matt 16:18??)

Spoiler Alert: ...upon the below more detailed review: !!!Hell NO!!! (Gal 1:6-9; cf. Rev 13; 17 and 18)
Cf.: 7 Reasons Why I AM NOT a Roman Catholic

Catholicism Refuted (Mike Winger)
Catholicism: Worth Arguing About (1st of 4 videos on Catholicism)
Refuting CATHOLIC Authority
Why Catholicism is WRONG
Unbiblical stuff the Catholic Church teaches: Mary, Indulgences, Eucharist, Priests, 7 Sacraments
+Catholic Apologists Abuse Typology to Teach Mariology


            ...Alright, upon especially after having viewed this conversion testimony (cf. here) of Teresa Beem [responded to here], I am going to, -in much more/deeper investigation, consideration and detail than what was done here, fully go through only a couple of RCIA (=Rite of Christian Initiation of Adults) series/“process”, namely this (20+class) one+this (27-class) one, while also skimming through the 1425-page Cathecism of the Catholic Church (CCC)...to see why 1.285 Billion Roman Catholics are so sure that the:

-Bible & Prophecy misinterpretation; contra-Biblical traditions; heretical doctrines; superstitious sacraments; non-Authoritative dogmas; whimsical canon; misguided councils; compromised Faith; paganized Church; fallible “infallibility”; Old Covenant-mimicking clerical order; dead/penance works; “saints” necromancy; images-worshiping; “bilocation” spiritism [really???!]; Eastern-meditative mysticism; eucharistic hocus pocus; vain repetitions; gesturing superstition; penitent penances and historical violence, sadism, crimes & murders of the Roman Catholic Church are actually “Godly” (i.e. both: Just & NT-mandated).... and not “(Roman) Babylonian”...

            ...But, candidly: “Heads Up”: Don’t get your hopes up...I.e.: As the RCC has already fulfilled various historical Bible Prophecies, -and to a literal, chronological and eventful “T” (=2 Pet 1:19 (NASB-margin)), there is indeed not much hope that its foundation is the words, faith and teaching of Jesus Christ (Luke 6:46-49)....Yet, it seems to me that despite my obvious Biblically-cemented foundational bias, if Catholicism is True/Biblical, then these indepth explanations from it for its views/teachings/beliefs, should convince and convict me since I am devoted to doing and believing whatever the Bible teaches....So let’s go, and let’s see:

RCIA 1: Who is God? How do we know God?

            “Who is God?” “How do we know God?” ... seems like the most natural/logical/factual answer to that question is to go to the book which claims to be about God to find out: the Bible.... But no, the approach here was to refer the expressions/opinions of all sorts of people about God....not a single reference to the Bible...but several from Church Fathers and Catholic Official...Right of the bat it is evident that the Catholic Church thinks it have higher Authority than the Bible.

            The presentation should instead have been titled “Does God Exist?” or “How do we know if/that God Exists?”. Then this philosophical approach would have been acceptable...
            Notwithstanding, God Himself states the best way to show that He exists and is all that He claims to be about Himself...by expositing on Bible Prophecy. (=Isa 41:22; 44:7; 46:9-11; cf. 48:3-7, 11, 14-16) Therefore the best approach to such a first/introductory lesson in learning about God and the Bible is indeed the study of the Dan 2, as most Biblically done in this post. (See also e.g.: this Church History Prophecy (Rev 11) and this (objective) Messianic Prophecy (Dan 9:24:27))  That prophecy literally ‘kills 3 faith birds with one stone’: It shows, through this historically-accurately fulfilled prophecy that God Exists; that the Bible is Inspired, thus Reliable and True, and that God does “All-Mightily” Declare and Fulfill the Future (=Isa 46:9-11).

            Another point from that RCIA approach: Perhaps I am not enough versed/indoctrinated in the Atheistic Evolutionist’s ideology/mentality/worldview, but I never got how Atheists are so concerned, some to the point of abandoning Atheism and converting to a Christian/Theist faith, about the provenance of feelings/emotions/features such as love & beauty...But then I got it...Evidently Atheists want to skirt moral responsibility by wholesalely claiming that if they feel, like or do something, it merely is because of “how they are wired”...i.e. they have no volitional input in this. So they then are allowed to do whatever the feel like doing....And that’s how everything evolved...Well it is evident that modern Atheists have “evolved” beyond that view because they increasingly want to advocate for whatever cause/action they think is moral/good/righteous (e.g. abortion). I really don’t see what is so impossible to understand and see/believe that a person can have desires for beauty and love, or contrarily chaos and hate, merely out of their own formulated will and desire...But of course, they therefore can dare claim that these volitional preferences and choices were also capable of being made by evolving things.
            An animal can volitionally choose something beautiful for their kind..but can a blade of grass also do so???...But the actual Trumping question is: who says/what decides/determines what is and what is not beautiful: Clearly merely “the eye of the beholder”....And, pertinently, compared to how the Bible describes this Planet/World both before the Fall and after God recreates it, the present world is far from “beautiful”, -it is even: most chaotic....So just because you (subjectively) think it is or is not, it does not really make it (objectively) so.

RCIA 2: The Sources of Revelation: Sacred Scripture & Tradition

            First of all, as a general advice, -and not that I am trying to help Catholics spread their teachings: Invest in Powerpoint. I.e. learn how to use it to make such presentations and provide visual imagery and documentation for the claims you are making.[1]1 It was 2011, now 2018....and I am sure the Catholic Churches can afford a computer & projector.*

* Yes!! Like in that other Catholic Church’s, 2012-2017, RCIA classes: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLH6hrVn7IkJWvta7E8y6j5b71ssmc64qb

...Now back to the substantive issues of this presentation:

But first, as a general note: when subsequently, the pertinent time markers of the video is included for responding entries, often times it is the time marker after a point has been completely made in the video, and not the start of it. So in those instance, one will have to slightly go back a little in the video to go to the beginning of the point being responded to here.

-I found it odd that the first many books of the Bible, namely the ones covering the pre-Israel monarchy period (i.e. chronologically before 1&2 Kings/Chronicles, thus: Genesis-Deuteronomy, Joshua, Judges Ruth etc) were not cited/posted in that timeline...why???

-Also, to me at least, if someone who posits to be a Bible Scholar, has trouble pronouncing the names of Bible books properly, -as if reading them for the first time (e.g. “Haggai”, “Obadiah”), it throws up a ‘Trump Two Corinthians’ flag of a degree Biblical Illiteracy....but perhaps those are Catholic pronunciations....

Don’t need Catholic Church Authority to determine canon
can pick & choose what is in accordance to the “established Law and Testimonies” (Isa 8:20) like Bible writers also did from some apocryphal books

Jews rejected the OT Pseudo
-they were Hellenized writings - not inspired people
-but mainly have historical value

Church is skewed from its wholesale/indiscrimiate inclusion of the Aprocrypha/Pseudopigraphia

Irony of the latin vulgate - If it was written to speak to the common language of the people, then why impose it on the whole Catholic world and why maintain it as the language of the mass until the mid 20th century when literally no common person spoke Latin.

interesting revisionist take on John Wycliffe
“didn’t do a good job” joke*
-“too literal” = too truthful
-“too archaic” = too true to original
why “condemn” him for a “bad translation”, why not just produce a better one: “because the plain translated word of God exposed to the common people the many contra-Biblical teachings and practices of the Catholic Church.

* One psyche-thing that is quite patently manifest from having viewed 5-presentations so far, is whenever a Catholic clergyman breaks from his patent hypnotically droning/monotonous composure [#NotImpressed] and momentarily “freaks out”, and also patently tries to camouflage this “freaking out” with an (off color) joke...it literally is because what they are reacting to has indeed gotten “under their skin. So yes it is true that the Catholic Church rejected John Wycliffe because his translation of the Bible in the common language of the People naturally exposed their many unBiblical teachings, traditions and practices of the Catholic Church, and later, Yes it is a significant fact that the RCC did not also incorporate the Gnostic Gospels into the Canon because they made a scholarly/theological judgment of the content, substantively comparing it with what the NT writers had said, and not through so sort of ‘mystical ecclesiastical perception/revelation’...So any Biblically Wise and Educated person can do just that today, especially with the added “canon” from properly interpreted Bible Prophecy.

“While he was saying Mass in the parish church on Holy Innocents' Day, 28 December 1384, he suffered a stroke, and died as the year ended. Wycliffe was 64 years old.”

Jean Wycliffe was exhumed and bones burned in 1428
-hiding history??
It was William Tyndale who was burned at the stake for translating the Bible into the common language. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SY3XSS_-ax8&t=3m56s

Luther removed “Deuterocanonical” books
Why do Catholics also call these 7 added books “DeuteroCanonical”
These are the source of most of Catholic heresy and paganism

Christian Bible not dependent on Luther’s Judgement or translation

sacrificial priesthood of Christ in Hebrews

[43:49] - “Catholic Church wrote NT” No it did not. The Apostles and NT authors were not “Catholic”...far from it....

Protestants returned to Apostolic Church source, not the Post-Apostolic skewing..which actually started to manifest itself in the times of the Apostles. Hence the many correcting letters of the Apostles to the Churches.
            And relatedly, Catholics love to claim as proof of their correctness/importance that “there was no NT/Bible/Canon in the early years of the Church (until the collecting and selecting work of the 325 A.D. Nicean Council, well that then offered ample of opportunity for various traditions to enter the individual Churches which were not practiced nor taught by the Apostles (as seen by the claims in heretical gospels/works) and it is only in the light of the collective testimony of all inspired NT books in ca. 325 A.D. that Christian Churches could then really examine if what they were doing was “Biblical”....It is then that there should have been a clean resetting for True/Biblical teachings and traditions but that was not done.
            So the Christian Church was indeed variously corrupted starting with the “Second Generation” of believers (ca. 70-100+ A.D.)...Even Paul saw and said that the anti-Christ’s “mystery of lawlessness” was already at work (2 Thess 2:3-4) and indeed soon thereafter, some Christians started to self-preservingly set aside the Sabbath Commandment in order to distinguish themselves from the punitively taxed Jews in the eyes of ROmans.
“Catholic put the Canon together”
-this was not by supernatural means. It was from scholarly examination.
Weak argument/proof

That we got 39 OT books from Jews doesn’t mean Judaism is true or infallible
Evidently Catholics do think so in their OT emulating procedural services

[01:02:15] ‘Gnostic Gospels are heretical’ counter-argument
-Just like Catholics use theological judgement to determine the Canon, Protestants can also do the same, no need of the Catholic Church to do so. Any Educated, informed, experienced and so “wise” Bible Scholar/Theologian can do so for themselves.
            In fact, as seen in this dedicated website* there are many other works/writings of the times which are not being considered/deemed as Canonical....So some people had to judiciously make that excluding vs. selecting determination.

Paul also spoke of Good Works in Ephesians 2:8-10  (after or before James ?)
“Good works” is not ‘penance works” i.e. (penal) works that one has to do (e.g. climbing a staircase on their knees) in order to “complete” the forgiveness/justification for their confessed sin.

Becoming Catholic (RCIA) #2 - "Start the Story Part One"

Seriously.....is that what you Catholics base your claim/teaching/dogma that “Evolution is also acceptable”:

1) Genesis Chapter 1 is not at all “completely different” from Genesis 2.
The initial account of Creation in Gen 1 actually ends at Gen 2:4.
Then from Gen 2:5ff Moses selectively recaps, but in much more detail, the accounts of Gen 1 starting in the Day 3, just before the creation of Vegetation to focus on the creation of God’s most important creation: Human Being on Day 6.

2) “How can you have a 24 hour day without the Sun?????”....Seriously are Catholics that daftly moronic:

(a) God can count.... ...even in the dark...(if even: Gen 1:3-5 -see here)...

(b) We have 24 hours days today not because of the sun and/or the moon...but because of the Earth’s rotations on its axis...which likely already was occurring since Day 1 of Creation... When God created the Sun, Moon and Stars it was just ‘to keep track of the passing of time” (Gen 1:16-18) ....E.g. just because someone does not own a watch or any other timekeeping device, it does not me that time is not regularly going on. God designed the Earth to complete a full revolution on its axis every 24 hours and that is what was in effect since Day 1.

So it is only Catholic moronicity which thinks that ‘Genesis 1-2.....11 are merely allegorical/poetry/“myths”.....and that’s how you begin to do the antichrist work of Satan....by undermine God and the Bible right from the very start....while deludingly claiming at the same time of course: “Oh look how powerful God is by having created Stars”.....

-So, evidently, i.e. based on the Vatican II Dei Verbum [documentary] constitutional dogma, Catholics do also believe that ‘whatever the Church Fathers said and did was inspired, and thus infallible’ and so is ‘“tradition” which is as good as the Bible’. That explains a lot, because the Church Fathers, bless their (confusing) hearts, were quite screwed up....especially with their allegorical [which is not even the acceptable: “typological”] way of interpreting Scripture, -made mainstream by Origen, -which Catholics consider as the way of interpretation which is “foundational”.

I can see how Catholicism readily appeals to Biblically illiterate/indifferent/ignoramus/incompetent people who have the innate pre-belief that ‘the Bible doesn’t know what it is talking about’ and needs the input of main to “calibrate” it.

-It’s not that complicated Catholic People: If God wanted all of the rituals of the Catholic Church, He would have inspired a NT Bible Writer to spell this out. But instead these Bible writers all speak of simple Faith (and not penance/ritual works) in Christ and also point to Christ as our only High Priest, Intercessor and Mediator....As Paul states, works of the law were only intended to serve as a tutor until faith in Christ came along. It’s simple as that....

-So Catholics like to harp on the fact that Martin Luther erroneously added the word “alone” to the Bible’s teaching of “saved by faith”...well, the substantive fact is that the “works” by which we are also judged = saved are not in regards to penances for the forgiveness of sins as in the works of the OT Law, but good works as Jesus did....I really can’t see why Catholics do not understand that. That too is so simple....

-This has already gotten really ridiculous...Clearly the only way/reason why Catholics do not see and understand such Biblically clear and simple things is because they have this fundamental dogmatic belief that “whatever their Church has ever officially/formally said and done” is inherently” infallible....no matter how ignoramus/incorrect/misguided it was...and not even the Bible can correct them...Good Luck with that....One cannot begin to argue against such looping circular bias...Scripture is not on the same level as Tradition...Jesus clearly said Scripture trumps and overrules traditions (Matt 15:1-8) Why, oh why else, is the Catholic clergy EXACTLY like the Jewish/Pharisaical Leadership that Jesus had to futilely try to Biblically reason with?????????????!

Becoming Catholic (RCIA) #3 - "Start the Story Part Two"

=CCC #390
[10:45] - Please, don’t tell me that Catholics do not believe that the serpent in Eden was Satan but just an “allegory”...The Bible clearly says so: Rev 12:9 and also that it was a literal event 2 Cor 11:3

[13:42] Comical, but quite how he/Catholics cannot make up his mind what is “figurative” and what is literal about the story of the Fall in Genesis...So did Adam and Eve fall/sin by listening to the lies of a (actually, according to the SOP, ventriloquistly*) talking serpent or not??????? How can this Catholic pastor here be faulting Adam for ‘just standing there and not intervening if this whole thing about a serpent talking to Eve is not literal/true’???????... Patent sign of a (poorly thought-through lie): MAKE UP YOUR “DAMNED”, WHIMSICAL, =(BABYLONIANLY) CONFUSED, MINDS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

* ST, May 29, 1901 par. 2: “With a voice that appeared to proceed from the serpent”

Veneration of Mary
[49:24ff] - Here we go with the Church Fathery allegorical takes (‘with Mary’)...despite this being a literal event in the Bible... One can easily claim anything with that subjective approach...Read the Inspired Commentary Writings of Ellen G. White to get added factual information, and thus deeper insight, on the literal/historical  events mentioned in the Bible.

[56:20] - Obviously, i.e. linguistically and Biblically, Mary was (actually: became) “full of grace” because, Rom 5:20 cf. 1 Tim 1:13-14, she had sin in her which need to be cleansed if she was going to be “favorable” (=Luke 1:30) to supernaturally conceive and carry the sinless God the Son in her womb [much like the camp of Israel had to be (annually) cleansed [=Day of Atonement] for God’s presence amongsts them to be possible] and raise Him who is to be the Savior of the World, the pivotal event-period in the history of this Universe....(I’m sure that if an angel was to likewise appear to Stephen (Act 6:8) he too would have been “vocatively” called “full of grace”...But that would not mean he had been immaculate, and that from birth, but just that he was graced/favored by God to do this pivotal powerful ministry.
            ....And it is for this gracious extension of sin-pardoning favor that Mary ‘rejoiced in God her SAVIOR’... Luke 1:47; cf. 2:11
-Compared to the great task at hand, the incubator of sinless God, Mary was indeed seen as most in need of grace/favor.
Exegetically: “favored one” in Luke 1:28, being in the perfect passive (participle) means: ‘having been bestowed favor’ i.e. by God (cf. Eph 1:6).* That grace came from God, it was not in/from Mary.

* Sirach (Ecclesiasticus) 18:17 is rightly translated as “a graced/blessed/favored person”.

It is only Jesus Christ who was “full of grace” (John 1:14). Indeed, rather than the verbal form that is used in regards to Mary in Luke 1:28; in John 1:14, a (describing) adjective is used to relate this innate attribute of Jesus Christ.

-Funny how Paul did not say, nor know to say: “all...except Mary...have sinned” in Rom 3:23....but only Pope Pius IX in 1854 suddenly knew that as a fact.

...Terribly sorry, but: Catholic Theology is literally a “comedy of {1700+ years of} errors”...-[Three’s Company style] - which is compounded by the fact that they believe that they can’t ever err..... Really wonder why it took the Catholic Church until 1950 before (officially) so venerating, effectively deifying/worshiping Mary?!!!!
            The Catholic Church is “damn if it doesn’t” and “doomed if it does”: If it admits to the errors, especially in regards to doctrines and traditions, of the Church in its past (along the lines of Pope Francis apologizing for the persecution of non-Catholic Christians), then it is doomed to cause a mass Exodus from its ranks and pews....[Like when my mom ceased to be Catholic upon hearing of the changes of Vatican II....because there went that prior-decisional “infallibility” claim]...If the Catholic Church rather choose to continue to build upon the erroneous foundation of its past, then it is indeed damned to be fulfilling the AntiChrist/Babylon/Man of Sin/Beast entity of Bible Prophecy...Choose your destiny....
            The issue is clear: if you believe that the leadership successors of the Apostles have the Discretion, Right, Authority and Power to enact teachings and practices which are different than what Jesus and His 12 Apostles (+Paul) of Christ has said and done, then you naturally don’t mind being a Catholic. If however you determine what is Truth or error using that “canon” of the New Testament writings, then you are much more concerned with being a Biblical Christian.

[56:50] “The Early Christian” = ‘the confused and confusing allegorizing Church Fathers’. Sorry but their homiletic claims about the Bible is not Scripture.  No wonder Catholics wouldn’t let people read the Bible for themselves if they also believe that it is subject to private allegorical interpretations.

[57:49] If Mary had refused God’s calling on her life, He would have sought someone else and likewise “graced/favored” them to be fit for this task.

[59:12] Terrible, even whimsical, reason for “honoring Mary”. Jesus only came into the human race as a infant so that belief in Him as God would be entirely by faith. But God could have done the same by bringing Jesus as a full grown man from some part of Israel....Melchizedek style (Heb 6:20-7:3).The fact that Jesus’ human origins were openly known only served as a needed added testing “stumbling” block for those who did not want to have Faith. (E.g. Luke 4:22; John 8:41b)

            And taking a step back: the OT is clear that the OT dead, in fact, as taught throughout the Bible, all of the dead to this day, are sleeping unconscious sleep in their graves until the resurrection of the last day...So no ‘dead people were looking on to see what Mary would decide’. Nor was Mary the only hope of the world...Jesus is, and if she said no, like failing OT Israel, God would have sought someone else.

[59:58] Learn to properly read the Bible...I.e. without your imposed bias: Gen 3:15...It is the SEED (=OFFSPRING) of the woman (=EVE), i.e. Jesus who is to crush the Serpent Satan on the head’...not Mary....Mary was not indispensable to God’s purposes
Quite debunking that Jesus said that Johnthe Baptist was the greatest man/person ever born (Matt 11:11a) and He shunned his early-on unbelieving, crowd-conforming mother (Mark 3:31-35)...and yet Jesus does not tell us to “honor John the Baptist”...All those who accept the Gospel and advance Christ’s Kingdom are as Great as John (Matt 11:11b). There is no shred of support for Mariology in the Bible, certainly not from Jesus Christ (Luke 11:27-28).... “But the Catholic Church says...”...of course it does....It is “in-the -place-of Christ”....

[01:01:02] When you address or punctuate your prayers to Mary, you have put her in the place of God and therefore are worshiping her...No matter what you mele-mouthly claim to deny that sequitur fact.

[01:01:39] So Mariology is even more vacuous than I thought...By the way, Why would Mary have said no to being the supernaturally impregnated mother of the Messiah...The main event competition then amongst women was “who would birth this expected Messiah?” If God had asked her to get impregnated by a man she reviled, than that would have been an honorary feat {kidding}...But seriously...Mary, of herself, did nothing worth building a co-redemptrice theology around...In fact you all Gentile Christians should instead be so thanking and “honoring” Paul for enduring all he did to spread the Gospel amongsts Heathens (while Peter (your falsely claimed first Pope) was not sure what to do with Gentiles and the OT ceremonial laws (Gal 2:7-21))..but of course, Paul wouldn’t let you (e.g. Acts 14:11-15)

[01:23:21] “Don’t read Genesis 3 literally” ....Seriously: GO TO HELL!!!!!  You Catholics are good at your Babylonian confusing double-speaking....Is that your trick to keep your sheeple desperate to have to come to you to figure out how you think the Bible should read.....Seriously... WHAT THE HELL!!!!!!!
            LOL!!! He again called Genesis a “myth”... (“but it’s a true myth”)...Just like a Satan-infested atheist would say about Genesis..GREAT JOB!!!...Seriously you are doing your AntiChrist’s Work very well (John 8:44)...I guess Jesus, Peter, Paul, etc were all wrong to refer to Genesis 1-11 as literal events....Get a life!!!!....Seriously, don’t you have anything better to do than to spread the Devil’s guileful lies....deceptively couched in partial truth (=Matt 4:1-11)....

Catholics must be really embarrassed by the “Eve and the talking snake” retort of Atheists...so they claim it is not literal...Then they got embarrassed by the Evolution claims of Darwin...so they said God cannot create in 7 days....Then pagans missed their idols...so the brought them into the Church (but renamed them)....Then the Sabbath made them seem like Jews, so they venerated Sunday...notice the pattern....

The antidote Biblical alternative to this “Story” pack of lies is the “Great Controversy Theme of the Bible” which starts with the same types of lies Satan told about God in Heaven.... 

Becoming Catholic (RCIA) #7 - "Sacred Scripture"

[24:13] So if you believe that the Holy Spirit had to inspire someone in order to write up the “great Poetry of Genesis 1-11*...Why can’t you believe that that Holy Spirit prophetically revealed/reminded, to Moses, the exact details of what l-i-t-e-r-a-l-l-y happened at Creation????!...

Genre of Genesis 1-11
* Nice slight of hand trick here...in order to make up for the fact that they do not believe that Genesis 1-11 is literal, Catholic have to make these exaggerated claims that it is ““GREAT” poetry”. Any literarily competent person can easily see that Psalms, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Songs of Solomon...Now that’s poetry. Genesis 1-11 straightforwardly tells a narrative story...just as found in Gen 12+.
            But what is occurring here is that Catholic have esegetically come to Scripture with their presupposed Evolution bias and so need to make the Word of God fit their bias....But I am not even convinced that Catholics believe in Evolution....They can’t even openly say so in these presentations...What is probably going on is their typical hoodwinking/mouse-trapping trick to try to get people to join their Church {probably from their perverting take of 1 Cor 9:20-23} where they indeed act like Chameleons (GC 571.1-572.2ff) and pretend to be whatever you are...(Even a Jesuit who read all of the writings of EGW confessed that she understands the mission and tactics of the Jesuit order perfectly).# Somewhere in the secret conclaves of the Church a Jesuits suggested that in order to reach the increasingly post-modern people with evolutionist thinking, Catholics need to pretend that Evolution is in perfect harmony with the Bible...So let’s now chuck out Genesis 1-11....Just like we chucked out the Sabbath, the Second Commandment, (=Dan 7:25) the Heavenly Priestly Ministry of (only) Jesus Christ (=Dan 8:10-12) ...etc... The same misguided compromising policy of the Church of the 3-4th century is still being implemented...of course because “the Catholic Church never errs”...

            And people (e.g. ex-SDA Teressa Beem) scoff at the fact that prophecy reveals that it will one day re-activate its now merely dormant persecutive Inquisition department and once again (sadistically) torture people who do not want to fall in line with them to death...Don’t they believe in their Church....It never changes...it just changes the “strategy” however it deems necessary at the time...
            It is this same liberal approach by which the Catholic Church lets many people think that they too are Catholic even if they do not follow certain teachings of the Church such as in regards to contraception, abortion, homosexuality, marriage, divorce, mass attendance, etc.. {LOL Teresa Beem cited the “hypocrisy” in the SDA Church as a reason why she left (e.g. vegetarian meat, some SDAs wearing jewelry, or drinking caffeine...so she left that river to swim in the ocean of hypocrisy of the Catholic Church....}

-So, btw, Catholic probably also claim that the “talking donkey” in Num 22:28-30...So animals cannot supernaturally be capable of talking (although the serpent in Eden was merely being ventroliquistically used by Satan)...but Catholic priests “create the literal body of Christ every Sunday at their mass?!??!!!!....I see...they are more powerful than God Himself...”the creator of their Creator”..... #blasphemy

Inspiration of Scripture
[27:18] The Inspiration of Scripture does not begin to be as complicated, or even mystical, as people assume it is.....Simply God at times directly revealed in dreams or visions something to a prophet of his and they related as accurately as the recalled (through another enabling act of God’s Spirit (of Remembrance; cf. Dan 2:1-3*) what they had seen. Other teaching parts of the Bible were, as with the letters of Paul, from Scholarly doctoral dissertational type of expose on what they understood about the Bible. If they were erring in what they were writing, then the Spirit pf God would surely have intervene to correct them. Then other writings in the Bible mostly merely journallingly or journalistically relate the experiences, feelings and devotional thoughts of various Bible writers. There really is nothing “compositionally calculated” in the writing of Scripture as Catholics and other similar theologians claim/believe...Bible writers most candidly just related what they had (prophetically) seen/experienced and scholarly knew/understand. The mystical claims/beliefs about Scripture actually circularly come from our end when we, now both time-wise and language/cultural wise seperatedly, are trying to figure out exactly what was said and meant in those straightforward writings. And with Catholics insisting on some mystical aspect of Scripture, then they obviously cannot just plainly read the Bible as it is written.

* Hey, I just realized that the Bible does not say that Nebuchadnezzar had *forgotten* the dream he had...he was just validatingly testing his sorcerers to see if they could supernaturally know what it was and so he could trust their interpretation. (=Dan 2:6, 8). It is the KJV which is misleading here somewhat by saying in Dan 2:5 that “the thing is gone from me...” which implies that it was the dream which was gone, but it rather was, as seen in the NKJV, NASB etc: ‘the decree/word/command that they should first tell him the dream itself and also the interpretation..or else’ is what has firmly gone out, or is now going out, from him.

[30:30] ...seriously.... how is the process of dictation between Jeremiah and Baruch his secretary supposed to be an example of “prophetic dictation” between Jeremiah and God. There is only “dictation” involved in the writings of Bible Writers when they relate what they “heard God said” “e.g. “the word of the Lord...” The other type of “dictation” is from the content of dreams and visions.

Apostolic Succession: Bishops
[40:29] There is also nothing mystical about the position/function of a “bishop” Greek: epĆ­skopos = "overseer", "guardian". 2 Tim 2:2 is actually the trumping verse to the superstitious “succession” claims of Catholic in regards to Church Bishops....Paul clearly tells Timothy to merely safeguard the things which he had heard and witness Paul preaching and doing. He did not tell Timothy to now come up with whatever new doctrine, teaching tradition he felt like implementing. The succession of such “entrusted” overseers/guardians is all in order to preserve the ‘faith once delivered to and by the apostles’ (Jude 1:3-4). It is the teachings of the Bible which is to be maintained throughout the passing centuries of believers...Even the ensuing True manifestation of the Spirit of Prophecy (e.g. in EGW) is really merely a call to return to what is already found in the Bible and not adding new doctrines to the Church.
            So “Bishops” (sounds too Catholichy), Overseers/Guardians of the Church are merely to be, like Timothy, people who are well versed in the teaching of the Bible writers (e.g. such as those today who are seminary educated) and the choice of some of them to be entrusted with properly, accurately and faithfully continuing to spread that original faith, pointedly in top tier leadership functions, (=ordination) is also not something mystical, but really just choosing the very best of pastors, in terms of e.g. knowledge, competence,  conduct, devotion and character (=2 Tim 2:14-16; 3:10-11) available then.
            The validity of Apostolic Successors is solely determined by how the teachings, practices, leadership and conduct of a successor harmonizes with the original Apostles, and not by any “genealogically-like) line of succession...Not surprisingly at all, the Pharisees likewise deemed that their validity was determined by a genealogical line, but that is far from the substantive case. The entrusted successors to the Apostle were neither perfect or inerrant and many of them soon began to compromise and distort the Faith that was established by Christ and the Apostles.

Also see this Biblical Debunking: Apostolic Succession Debunked (Was Peter First Pope_)

[42:00] Wow...Uncanny...Catholics, like the Jews/Pharisee, manifestly think that there is a hidden Oral Tradition in the Church....Trust me, whatever oral thing Paul said that was enduringly important, the Holy Spirit prompted him to put it down in writing and circulate it...like his “Hebrews” Epistle....

[43:25] Wrong!!!...What is being passed on is...what the original Apostles taught and practiced...Not any (mystical) Authority to Teach or Interpret....Anyone today who diligently learns the original languages of the Bible can have such Ability to Teach and Interpret...Only those who accurately do so recognizedly have an Authority in the Church. What Catholic really, or in effectuation, understand and mean here is: the authority to claim whatever they privately want about the Bible....Granted, I’ll concede that Catholics do not deliberately mischievously do so, but the fact is that they are both so drunk in their own sense of supposed inerrancy and infallibility, and also are actually not that exegetically competent, i.e. purely on a scholastic level, that they end up “Spiritually” claiming all kinds of whimsical and unBiblical things.

[44:00] There is ample and sufficient teaching in the Bible on how the communion is to be done: I.e. Jesus during the last supper and 1 Cor 11:17-35. The whole “mass” ritualistic thing of Catholics is indeed mere tradition....And it does not mean that that is what the Apostles themselves thought or did...Catholic Mass on its face seems to be a blending of Greek/Roman cultic practices....Indeed: http://amazingdiscoveries.org/S-deception_paganism_Catholic_mass_silver

Cataholic have clearly been adding to the Communion celebration in the Bible...
...Again because they unBiblically think/believe that they have this authority to enact entirely new teachings and practices...That is why Protestants returned to the teachings of the Christ, the Apostles and other Prophets and Writers of the Bible. #SOLA SCRIPTURA and rejects these tact on traditions of the Catholic, pointedly because they contradict Scripture. (Matt 15:1-8)...We are indeed literally back to First Century Jews and their traditions vs. Jesus and the actual teachings of Bible....

[47:54-50:38] LOL...So now these Catholic pastors/priests think that whatever homelitic/dramatic license thought they have is an inspired prophetic revelation...Again read the actually prophetic inspired revelations of EGW (e.g. in the Desire of Ages) to get such additional actual, not Bible-recorded, information/details on Bible events.

[50:56] Talk about “doing really scary things from misinterpreting Scripture”: Most Prominent Case In Point: The Roman Catholic Church...to this day...and, as also prophesied: into the future...But “no...it is inerrant”.....

[52:00] The argument/reasoning that “something is true because we’ve always done it or believe it to be so” is so unspeakably asinine.....

[59:00] So what determine if the Catholic Pope knows that what he is saying is (supposedly) infallible????

Paul’s Apostleship
[01:03:32] Paul indeed is the death knell to Catholic Apostolic Succession claim and belief because it shows that God raises up and chooses whoever He wants through an act of the Holy Spirit, including Prophetic Calling and Revelation, to become ordained leaders in His Church...it does not have to go through an earthly unbroken line....

[01:04:50] Paul clearly states that he conferred, and in private with the other Apostles, 3+14 years after he had begun preaching and only to have them ascertain that what he was preaching was indeed Biblical and they indeed did not have any objections. (Gal 1:15-2:10)..and the “running in vain” part is actually, as stated in the John MacArthur Study Bible notes, in regards to not seeing his various efforts and preaching wasted if he was preaching the non-application of the Mosaic Law to Gentiles but the Jewish Christian Church would then be forcing Gentile Converts to be subject to it. It was not actually that Paul feared that his teaching was erroneous. As stated in the SOP, this was a wise strategic approach by Paul:

            The Wisdom of Paul.--Paul . . . describes the visit which he made to Jerusalem to secure a settlement of the very questions which are now agitating the churches of Galatia, as to whether the Gentiles should submit to circumcision and keep the ceremonial law. This was the only instance in which he had deferred to the judgment of the other apostles as superior to his own. He had first sought a private interview, in which he set the matter in all its bearings before the leading apostles, Peter, James, and John. With far-seeing wisdom, he concluded that if these men could be led to take a right position, everything would be gained. Had he first presented the question before the whole council, there would have been a division of sentiment. The strong prejudice already excited because he had not enforced circumcision on the Gentiles, would have led many to take a stand against him. Thus the object of his visit would have been defeated, and his usefulness greatly hindered. But the three leading apostles, against whom no such prejudice existed, having themselves been won to the true position, brought the matter before the council, and won from all a concurrence in the decision to leave the Gentiles free from the obligations of the ceremonial law (LP 192, 193).  {6BC 1108.4}

            Probably to also quell claims that he was a rogue preacher, Paul here let the Apostles and the Jewish Christian Church think that they were judging him and his ministry, when he knew that they would not be able to contravene what he had been preaching and claiming. With some people who are full of jealous pride, it is indeed an effective strategy to let them pompously think that they are in charge...when they are just doing exactly what you want them to do...
            This is a perfect example of how Catholicism is a castle build up with “moronic” takes of Scripture. This is, simplistically, not Paul submitting himself to the Church, this is Paul, 17 years after the fact, aiming to have his work be also upheld by the Church. Catholicism is indeed a “cradle roll” denominational bloc of Christianity...tellingly enough when it comes to the exegetically proper understanding of Scripture...Because in all other matters which they have deemed necessary to Christian Worship, they are quite complicated and convoluted....

New Light/ Teaching Evaluation
[01:09:42] So I can technically agree with that ‘Gospel Order’ way of making sure that claims of new light/teaching are properly vetted in the Church...But of course what actually determines what is Truth or not is not merely the orderly vetting process, but the substance of such an evaluation...and clearly the exegetical and theological incompetency of the Catholic Church also extends to its Teaching Ministry....
            Quite commendable in its own right, to see that Catholic clergymen “check themselves” in regards to novel teachings/claims/takes/interpretations.
[01:11:33] The New Light that Jesus was presenting was indeed not according to “what the Jewish People had always thought/believed”...well that is because ‘they only were doing somethings of the OT while ignoring other requirements of God’ (Matt 23:23-24) and that is what Jesus ministry was all about...and it naturally resulted in the New Covenant...when also the outward and ritualistic things of the Old Covenant were no longer needed in order to “tutorially” (Gal 3:23-25ff) lead people into fulfilling this law (Jer 31:31-34) and thus being and doing righteousness. (=Matt 5:17-20; cf. Amos 5:21-24)

Church Councils                                                      
[01:16:22] Speaking about Church Council, which indeed has its Biblical Basis in the Jerusalem Council of Acts 15 (SDAs themselves have their General (=World) Conference Sessions every 5 years), Catholics have many “forms” and structures of Biblical Christianity, but it is their substance/product which is wanting and deficient (cf. 2 Tim 3:5)

[01:26:44] As here, Catholics always spoil a (relatively) refreshing candid expression of candid faith in a candid prayer...with some mystical rote ritualism....

Change of Sabbath to Sunday
[15:30ff] So Catholics know/admit that Sunday Keeping began after 67 AD when Christians tried to differentiate themselves from the Jews. They must have shared the memo from the research* of Samuele Bacchiocchi in ca. 1977 in their Vatican Gregoriana University in Rome who, as his professor said, discovered the “death knell” to the common belief up to then that it was the Apostolic/Jerusalem Church which had made the switch from Sabbath to Sunday when documents showed that the Jerusalem Church was keeping the Sabbath through to time of the outbreak of War between the Jews and Rome in 66 A.D. and continued to do so in the area of Pella where they, heeding Christ’s warning (Matt 24:15-20), fled to.

History of the Mass
[38:00] - So the present Catholic Mass tradition is also a “comedy of errors”...just making up traditions as you’ve gone along...You admit that the Apostles, and the Christian Church for centuries, never believed that Jesus was “concentrated/present/recreated in the bread and wine” but some “golden mouthed” preacher suggested that in ca. 400 A.D. and this became Catholic belief....

[57:16] LOL ‘Bells had to be rung to get people to pay attention at certain “important” times during Catholic mass’... =Victim of their own traditions....

RCIA 3: The Holy Trinity & God, the Father and Creator
[01:25] ...Why stubbornly insist that ‘Jesus was born in 1 A.D.’, no matter how documentedly false???....Why ignore that correcting “archeological glitch finding”???...Because it was a Church (commissioned) monk who came up with the 1 A.D. claim...and the Church accepted it....and the Church is never wrong or ever makes a mistake.... Catholicism in a nutshell: “We don’t care when we’re wrong”.... Our “traditions” are inerrant & infallible....

[01:38] Jesus actually began preaching in the Spring of 28 A.D. and was crucified in the Spring of 31 A.D. #Historical/ChronologicalFact

[02:14] 66 books not 73....those 7+ Hellenistic, Judaism-also-rejected “Deutero-Canonical” books is the whole ballgame right their about Catholicism....Just because those additional books may contain some truthful things, -such as those alluded to by NT Writers, it does not mean that the books are entirely true/reliable = Scripture.

[07:08] Here is the irreconcilable road block with Catholicism: Here it is claimed that the whole testimony of Scripture on a topic has to be considered to in order to determine what a true teaching is. Well properly interpreted Scripture from the established 66 books show that:

-the dead unconsciously sleep in their grave until the resurrection;
-the Sabbath was never changed to Sunday by the Apostolic Church;
-Christ is the only High Priest and Mediator between God and man
-Hell’s judgement in neither now, nor won’t be eternal

            So that would eliminate many teachings of the Catholic Church, including those derived from those 7 Deutero-Canonical books because they are contrary to that established Canon...But Catholic do not care about this pointedly because “there is 2000 years of teaching” of those errors....It’s a futile “chicken or the egg” conundrum...If your “2000 years of teaching” is because of the erroneous understanding of post-Apostolic “Bishops” and Church Fathers, then why must it be still right/true just because “that’s what we’ve always thought”. If the Bible (i.e. 66 books) is not the final arbitrator of what is Truth, but Tradition is, then a Catholic will never come out of their errors.

[11:05] “Allegorical” Interpretations cannot have authoritative weight because it is inherently subjective. And it would not destroy the literalness of the OT event. I only trust the allegorical, more like typological, takes stated by NT writers...but of course Catholics, picking up on the practice of Church Fathers to try to also do this same thing....

[12:48] Certainly you cannot believe that whatever that is recorded in the Bible that happens in this life has foreshadowing implications for what will happen in Heaven....Again here, I would leave it up to such applications made by Bible Writers...E.g. in the example cited here of the Last Supper and Marriage Supper of the Lamb (Rev 19:7-9), Jesus Himself had clearly said that this would also be done in Heaven (Matt 26:29)
            Again, here is the major difference with Catholics: They believe that they have the right and authority to make such novel/new allegorical and anagogical applications, and unlike Protestants who may at times do such things, but who only see them as having merely illustrative homiletic weight, Catholic see such claims as Scripturally binding.
            Catholics believe that such Authority is inherent in their Church Leadership, while Protestants see it as only granted in special gifting, such as the prophetic gift. And yet Catholic still differentiatingly speak of “ex cathedra” statements. SDAs here can relate due to the prophetic ministry and writings of EGW. Proper SDA comprehension knows that not every that EGW said and wrote is as reliable/Authoritative as Scripture, i.e. a direct revelation from God. These statements are still subject to be corrected by Scripture is/when applicable. But EGW did receive many direct dreams, visions and thoughts which are indeed as Authoritative as what was directly revealed to Bible writers. Even Paul himself spoke of “statements from permission” (personal views) vs. “statements of commission” (direct revelations).
            It would be good if Catholic would also allow themselves to be ultimately subject to Scripture...but they have this facade of Papal/Church infallibility and inerrancy to try to maintain.
[23:00] My Theological View on the Trinity* a single God entity went on to clone Himself into 3 entities for specific functional reasons. They all share the Eternal DNA, as well as the same Eternal mind/consciousness/knowledge, but when they became 3, they then each added their own mindset to their personality. This view explains the “begotten”** statements as well as the Father-Son nature and hierarchy.

** Apparently that was the other of two, i.e. non-Arianism, =Church of Alexandria view at the 325 A.D. Council of Nicea debate:  “the Son had been 'begotten' by the Father from his own [i.e the Father’s] being, and therefore [also] having no beginning” 

RCIA 4: The Creation Story, The Fall, the Preparation for the Savior

[11:31] The thing about the various creation stories in antiquity, as well as flood destruction stories is that they all have the same conceptual genesis from the fact that all of these people group originally are descendants of Adam and then Noah and his 3 son’s families. So while the True stories (i.e. as they are recorded in the Bible) was likely retold to these generations of peoples as they were starting out, over time they became subjectively corrupt as these people moved more and more away from worshipping the Creator God.

[12:18] See that’s patently where Catholic Theology goes off the deep end....It repeatedly has this “eyes of a man” view on Holy, Sacred and Spiritual things (=Dan 8:8b) and so always brings in a humanistic/naturalistic aspect into Divine matters (e.g. idols, pagan rituals) which ends up corrupting the Holy. Those various human creation stories did not “affect” the Jew’s story for Genesis....It was the other way around....But of course, Catholics reject the Creation account of Genesis as a mere “myth” fabrication...Funny how they claim it is “true”...”true” of what??????? There is nothing in Genesis which harmonizes with your (even “Theistic”)   Evolution claim. It is like claiming that “Dora the Explorer” (or whatever) is a “true” representation of the Discovery of America. The Bible’s Creation details do not at all align with Evolution. E.g. how can plants grow in a “third day age” of before the presense of the sun in a fourth day age????? The Bible has no problem with that since, as seen here*, God Himself was providing that Light until the Fourth Day. Indeed the Powerful Photosynthesis Energy needed to make the Earth’s vegetation sprout up within 1 day could only be provided by the Glorious Light of God and not by the Sun.

[15:04] The claim of “ex nihilo” Creation is also not in the Bible....it is a concept which comes from apocryphal writings, The Bible instead says in Hebrews that God created from that which is not seen (i.e. atoms). Bit all of this atomic matter was present...God just organized it into what we now have...and that Atomic Matter came from the Divine Glory Energy that God the Son Jesus Christ bestowed for the Creation of all things. That is why “He is in all things”, not in terms of Spirit, but merely in terms of matter...and that is how/why God sovereignly “owns” the Created Universe and Satan, or any other created being can claim it from Him.

[18:00] See the pagans took that “Male and Female likeness” fact in Creation and concocted their own humanistic/naturalistic version of it.

“Catholics are free not to believe in any part of evolutionary theory.”

-So 37% of Catholics are (Young-Earth) Creationists [that’s a relief] compared to 45+11 who believe some form of Evolution
“The Catholic Church holds no official position on the theory of creation or evolution, leaving the specifics of either theistic evolution or literal creationism to the individual within certain parameters established by the Church.”
-“Chameleon” Cowards. I thought Catholicism was all about having uniform doctrine...especially as determined by the Church and Pope...Why so indecisive/clueless about this issue???????...Because the teachings and understandings of the Catholic Church do not come from God...but they just make it up as they go along...and here, it is more expedient to be ambivalent since the Church laity is split ca. 40/60 (=Conservative vs. Liberal) on the issue. The Catholic stands for nothing as it literally stands for “whatever you want”....just, even if merely nominally, call yourself Catholic)

“Even before the development of modern scientific method, Catholic theology had allowed for biblical text to be read as allegorical, rather than literal, where it appeared to contradict that which could be established by science or reason. Thus Catholicism has been able to refine its understanding of scripture in light of scientific discovery.”
-So the ‘god’ of Roman Catholicism is, like Atheists: Science

[25:14] Catholic Theology Spoiler Alert: Man does not have a soul; man is a soul....and only when alive (Gen 2:7)...[26:57]: and the “soul” Biblically merely is/means “living beings” which is why animals are also spoken of that way (Gen 1:20-21, 24, 30; 2:19) The whole historical theological confusion here is that Catholic Theology, and late Jewish Theology was influenced by the dualism of Greece. The “soul” merely is the consciousness/mindfulness, that indeed both humans and animals, to a lesser degree of course, have. But there is nothing mystical or spiritual involved here. It is just the conscious “being”.

[31:13] It’s so comical that this Catholic can clearly see that there actually is not “difference” between Gen 1 vs. Gen 2 but that Gen 2 just give more detail” but he has to self-contradictorily operate from the Evolutionary Catholic context that Gen 2 was contradictorily given by someone else...although he goes on to say nothing “contradictory” to Gen 1. Moses just went into more detail about the Creation Humans in Gen 2....Simple as that.....But of Course, the Catholic Church can never go back on its prior misunderstandings and so, best case scenario, just adds self-contradictory blocks to that shaky foundation....

[50:30] ...wait...why are you treating Gen 4 “Cain & Abel” as a literal story??????????????MAKE UP YOUR (SUBJECTIVE WHIMSICAL) MINDS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[52:33] What do you mean “thousands of years” after Adam&Eve...why not “millions”....

[59:15] LOL a Jesuit* invented the Big Bang Theory....Great Job AntiChrist....

[01:05:08] Who says Genesis Creation is not meant to be taken literally as being completed in 7 days...Oh yeah the stupid supposition of that Evolution Theory,,,You double-minded/speaking Catholics are confusing yourselves...

RCIA 5: Jesus Christ: Son of God, Savior, Messiah, Lord and The Birth of Jesus & His Public Ministry

[00:38] Wait “posits”...Why, manifestly, aren’t you uphold what Augustine said as “gospel”...Because you actually exercise judiciary evaluation of what Church Fathers said.

[04:25] Michael was Jesus in OT Era Times
-Why term Angels as “saints” If it’s because you believe saved humans become as angels, then humans should be termed according to angels, not vice versa.

[04:55] The Evil Angels are not in “Hell” but in outer darkness i.e. anywhere in the Universe outside of the Heavenly Realm and Unfallen Worlds/Galaxies. And they have full access to this Earth as it is Fallen.

[06:50] As seen in this post,* I accept as valid the claim about Raphael however I reserve fully/wholesalely accepting all that is said in Tobit until a more careful analysis.

[13:20] Much like Catholicism has a plethora of secret societies who work in the dark lest they be exposed....LOL Catholics themselves are leery of their (unscrupulous) Jesuit Order.

[14:40] Speaking of the Devil... So I theologically* do not believe as Biblical the Classical Foreknowledge view which claims that God *knows* what will take place in the Future. The Bible instead teaches that God *declares* what will take place and then sets out to accomplish it. So then my question is, how did God know from the days of Ancient Babylon & Medo-Persia that their would be a Catholic Church which would seek to change times and law and persecute the righteous (e.g. Dan 7:25)...Short answer: because God knew that if Satan would ever be successful in impeding His Cause of Righteousness, that is exactly what he would have to do....and he would find people drunk on pride enough to go along with this plan. If fact Satan started doing that with the OT Jewish Leaders and Pharisee sect....And the set out to redo the same, and furtheringly in the Catholic Church leaders and the Papacy.

[36:14] Catholics are trying to eat their cake and have it too with their “half-pregnant” claim about Evolution...There’s no Godifying that Bible-belying heresy...You only fooling yourselves....

RCIA 6: The Passion, Death, and Resurrection of Jesus

[02:26] ...no it’s not...not unless you are preprogrammed to think that it is...

[15:50] as far as I can tell....oddly enough, I have no issue of difference in regards to Christology itself with Catholics....but I do have an issue with how they went about dealing with people who had issues of difference on this in their history...i.e. they used the military power of Rome to persecute and kill them....a mandate that they were not given to by Jesus Christ, but that they took upon themselves through having faithlessly yoked up with the pagan Roman state.
            I technically would also have an issue with the manifest notion here that “if a Church council settled an issue in the past, then it is irreversibly the settled truth for all time. No one or no generation of people is perfect and all knowing and so I would reserve the right of a Church Council to make any correction to a past decision if new information and/or maturing experience would lead them to do so.

[20:13] Since the Bible states that Jesus is the Second Adam, then how can his mother Mary be “the second Eve” as she was not the wife of Jesus...and Eve had come from Adam #eisegesis Ergo: It was Jesus who was Sinlessly Divine....not Mary #exegesis 

[21:17] Objection: Speculative Theologizing....No wonder Catholics think that the Church Fathers and all of their allegorizing were interpretational experts...It is most ironic, but provingly telling, that Catholics are capable of making all of these term/theme association interpretations, but they cannot make heads or tails about the prophecies of the Bible (i.e. Daniel and Revelation) which do depend on such term/theme association to unlock the symbols* used there. That is proof that Catholics are not “righteous” (Dan 12:4, 9-10)

It is also quite telling that Catholic claim that the plain passages of the Bible have allegorical meanings, and so come up with all of their heretical claims/doctrines...but then they claim that the symbolized prophecies of the Bible are literal. #Confusion = #“Babylon”

[35:42ff] So that is of course why Mel Gibson did his bloody and gory “Passion of the Christ” movie....except the Sacrificial Lamb in Jewish OT services in the Bible was not: tortured, abused or gorily killed when sacrificed. Jesus had to die, yes...but He did not have to suffer...all of His suffering was to be purely psychological.* The physical suffering was all mere happenstance from the Historical Fact that the Roman were world rulers then, and they used the brutal method of Crucifixion...and the Jewish leaders turned to them to have Jesus killed...If they had been faithful, Jesus would still have to die, but, as discussed in here**, really in the humane Abraham-Isaac way (Gen 22). The Jews would have obediently offered up their Messiah as the Scripture called for and maybe God would have intervened, as He did for Abraham, and the Kingdom of God would have been established then with Jesus being alive and well and reigning in Jerusalem...and likely it would be entirely the Gentiles/Romans themselves who would have sought out Jesus to put Him to death...and He would have let them...but the be raised 3 days later and regain His Throne in Jerusalem and non-violently, through the preaching of that Full Gospel, put an end to all of the Gentile/Pagan cultures/nations/societies

[50:20] ...WHOOOAAAA.....You are typologically conflating things here. The Sacrifice of Christ on the Cross anti-typically fulfilled the Passover Feast/Sacrifice....Then the Sanctuary in Heaven was inaugurated and Christ has been operating there fulfilling the daily ministry of the priest during the year....And then in the time of the end, starting in 1844 (=Dan 8:13-14), the antitype of Yom Kippur/Day of Atonement began. This was the time of Judgement for Israel, and so is now the final Investigative Judgement process of New Israel* ...So why don’t Catholics get this....because, through their revived OT-mimicking priesthood system, they fulfilled the prophecies which said that the “Little Horn”** Anti-Christ/Man of Sin*** power would eclipse the daily ministry of Jesus in the Heavenly Sanctuary (Dan 8:9-12)....You’all would do well to learn&heed Bible Prophecy...It will keep you on the right path. (2 Pet 1:19)

So that is why Catholics have a depiction of a battered and bloodied Christ on the Cross emphasizing His physical suffering...Protestant have an empty Cross emphasizing the resurrection...But the real “symbol” to have, and to actually seek to emulate is the psychological resisting/enduring of sin of Gethsemane (=Heb 12:3-4)

[50:45] Nope....The blood sprinkled on the veil was on the second/inner veil, inside the sanctuary so out of the sight of the people outside who could not enter into the sanctuary. The blood flung towards the Most Holy Place and splattering on its veil was to indicate that God was taking responsibility for death and the on the Day of Atonement that blood covered veil was “Cleanse” hence the annual “Cleansing of the Sanctuary” (Lev 16; Dan 8:14) when then the Judgement was done and God Himself (cf. Rom 3:4(margin)/Psa 51:4) was cleared of the (still today common claim against Him) that He has shed innocent blood (=Rev 15:2-4)

[51:06] Azazel the scapegoat is Satan not Christ...after the clearing Judgement sin&death are seen to indeed to be entirely the fault of Satan and so they are placed on him and the “strongman” Christ takes him out to the wilderness to err until he dies. Catholics really do not understand the typology of the OT Sanctuary System...

[51:08] LOL it is not because “sin had grown so much” that the God-Man Jesus had to now come and die instead of sheeps and goats...the Sacrifices in the OT system were always just mere types of what Jesus would have done even if only one person had committed one sin and they wanted to be saved.

[52:24] The temple veil separated the Most Holy Place where God presence was, from the Holy Place. Its Divine riping revealed that God had “desolated” that Earthly Temple. Now Jesus Himself would appear as Our Only High Priest and Mediator in the Heavenly Temple. (=as explained in the book of Hebrews)

[56:06] The Creed is wrong. Jesus did not descend to Hell. Hell does not now exist. The “spirits in prison” of 1 Pet 3:19 leads to a wrong interpretation if viewed in unexegetical isolation. It is saying that the Holy Spirit also preach to people in the days of Noah who were in their prison of sin trying to convict them to repent.

[56:30] It is 3 inclusive days, counting partial days as a whole....and that count can also begin from the start of Christ’s passion in Gethsemane on Thursday night.

[57:29] That is not what the Parable of the Rich Man & Lazarus was about...It was a parable based on the common Greek view of the afterlife because that is the only way such a depiction could be made. The point of the parable is Luke 16:31 foreshadowing the episode and fallout with the real Lazarus.

[59:50] WRONG Sabbath is still on Saturday*...You all should know since you know you are the ones who made the change to Sunday and not the Apostolic Church. There is no “eighth” day...therefore no superstitious octagonal things...

[01:02:00] Similar to the present post for the Catholic Religion, I too had an expose, including a discussion with a Rabbi about the religion of Judaism.

Becoming Catholic (RCIA) #5 - "Who is Jesus?"

[00:41] Catholic got “inspired” about Jesus by the work of a Protestant: Timothy Keller....Kirsten Powers should go back to her Christian conversion roots...

RCIA 7: The Holy Spirit and the Early Church

[15:18] Thesis: The Roman Catholic Church retroactively retraced its technical history through first 300 years (Council of Nicea which harmonized the faith of various Christian groups
Apostolic/NT Church = 31-Death of John 95
Ante-Nicene Church = ANFathers 95-325
Council of Nicea 325
The Christian Church(es) singularly technically (rather than mere adjectivally) became the “Catholic” i.e “Universal” i.e.: “throughout-the-whole” when it was unified as a single homogenous/united body under the headship of Rome and the Roman Bishop in the Post Nicea Council Era.

[18:55] Why all these Shrine Church over burial spots?????? = Necromantic
-Thesis: To fuel Church’s mystical/processional relic commerce...

[37:36] If fasting every Friday is supposed to be required, then why doesn’t the Catholic Church simply “remind” its “forgetful” members???!! Because that Council’s decision has no Biblical, or Ecclesiastical for that matter, authority.

[37:48] Why is “doing a good deed” a “penance”???

[39:00] Protestantism has actually been increasingly subtracting what was not Biblical, including Church traditions which are contrary to the Bible, from its worship & practices. They actually think that Sunday Sacredness is Biblical/Apostolic, when it actually is a contra-Biblical (Early) Church Tradition which the Roman Catholic Church made formal in ca. 370 A.D. Council of Laodicea.

[42:23] “priesthood” is an invention of the Catholic Church: The NT only allows for Overseers and Local (Teaching) Pastors/Itinerant Evangelists and [Lieutenant-ing] Elders. In the NT, the “priests” are each individual members. =They confession their own sins directly to Christ and prepare their own self to be fit to take the Communion...No “priestly”, especially sacramental, mediation is needed.

[42:59] Not everything mention in the Didache is “Gospel”..Catholics themselves reject it as a Canonical unlike some early/other Christian traditions..I wonder why????...gotta to read it entirely for myself....

[45:40] Justin Martyr [100-165AD] was confused...Jesus did not mean to take this saying about “his body & blood” literally: John 6:41ff...It means: faithfully sharing in the ideological understandings and practical experience of Jesus (TM 110.1). Perhaps if an Apostle was still alive then, he would have straighten out Justin’s mis-believing....

[47:26] see that “day of the Sun” and even “resurrection” view of Justin Martyr to claim Sunday Sacredness showed how the post-Apostolic Christian Church very early on began to take on all kinds of skewing ideas and interpretations...If the Church could become corrupt during the lifetime of Paul and the other Apostles (hence the correcting/teaching letters sent to them) how much more likely when all of these (original) Apostles had died. The Truth was in going back to what was said in the NT Canon, but clearly these second-generation believers are mixing in their own ideas and interpretations.

[49:24] The Greek-based term: “presbyter” is NOT “a fancy name for priests” as evidently Catholic leaders try to hoodwink their unsuspecting sheeple. It is the exegetical name for: “elders” in the NT as well as the OT (see in the Septuagint -LXX) where it is a distinct position than that of (OT) priests...Ergo: there indeed is not “priestly” position in the New Covenant!!!!! (cf. Eph 2:18)
            -Trumpingly telling how the NT has a chapter By Paul about the qualifications for an Overseer (Greek: bishop] Elder [Gr. presbyter] and a Deacon [Gr. diakonos] (also prophets, apostles, pastors, teachers, evangelists are named positions cf. Acts 15:2, 4, 6, 23] but nothing about “priests” or “high priests” (Greek hiereus {Strongs #2409}  e.g. Heb 7:14; Acts 23:14; 24:1; 25:15)
            That is why, unlike the Douay-Rheims (=“ancients”) and the New Jerusalem Bible (“elders”) the other Catholic Bible, the New American Bible(s), do not even dare translate the Greek word “presbuteros” in the NT, but only transliterate it as an ambiguous/mysterious “presbyter” so that they can, as done here, ascribe to it the misleadingly spurious meaning that they need to justifying their non-Biblical New Covenant “priesthood” claim & system.

[50:00] Paul mentions traditions that the Church had (2 Thess 3:6)...but Jesus clearly said that traditions cannot supercede Scripture (Matt 15:1-8|Mar 7:5-13; Col 2:8)

[51:08] Fasting is not actually mandatory but voluntary, and can be done in various “self-privating” forms....

[53:10] Thesis: Clemente of Rome was ordained a “bishop” (=overseer/guardian) or “elder” by Peter...not a “priest”....

[54:25] That “line of succession” is not actually mystical, but actually to prove the “chain of custody” of the Apostolic/Biblical traditions and teachings...though it actually is not necessary immune from the “telephone game” effect, even from the successors adding their own ideas and twists to the original Apostle teaching and tradition. The fact that the Church Fathers so copiously many times just merely quoted from the writings of the NT, and also OT, shows that they considered the Bible as the Authority....though they did introduce many erroneous views and also started my non-conforming traditions.

[54:58] Peter was not a Pope...and it was James who was the first leader of the Church (Acts 15)...with the full acceptance of Peter. Catholics made up this Papal Succession claim, as well as the Primacy of the Bishop(s) of Rome, misusing this inert “chain-of-custody” listing of Irenaus.

[01:01:50] That’s not what another Catholic Priest/Pastor said about the Mass...See: “History of the Mass” earlier...He said that the earlier Church DID NOT celebrate mass at all, certainly not a Catholic now do...but they effectively made it up as they went along.

RCIA 8: The Catholic Church (... as Priest, King)

[16:00] In the New Covenant, the Church members are their own priest and the “Shepherd” is the Pastor...as that word literally is in the Greek.

[32:00] So this is, pun intended, the foundational error of the Catholic Church...It’s reading/interpretation/application of Matt 16:18.

"Peter = The Rock"
-First of all, the Greek in Matt 16:18 does not say: Cephas...it says ‘petros’.... Strange that this pastor does not know that. Cephas is a Greek transliteration-equivalent of the Aramaic and is “Petros” in Greek. (=John 1:42)

-Then Jesus mentioned a “Petra” upon which He will build is Church. Petra is feminine, petros is masculine. While they are one and the same word, in Greek, as in Hebrew, the feminine is the large form “from which” other parts proceed (just as in a women bearing children). So Jesus was focusing on the larger “Petra” statement that Inspiredly had been expressed by the petros Peter. And so He was saying he would build the Christian Church on the fact that He was the Messiah, the Son of the Living God.

-Abraham is no “rock”. That clearly is just manufacture Catholic typology allegory to try to magnify their take on Peter. All that Abraham did in relation to a Rock was offer Isaac on one, manifestly where the Temple of Israel was then built. The name “Ab-rah-am” means “Father of THE people”.
Jesus clearly said He was the equivalent/replacement of Abraham (John 8:56, 58). The Bible is unequivocal, it is “Christ” (and His Words (Luke 6:46-49)) who is the “Rock” of the Church , its “Cornerstone” (Matt 21:42; Psa 118:22; Rom 9:33)...even Peter knew that. (1 Pet 2:6)...The apostle were just complimentary foundational stones to that cornerstone. (Eph 2:20) No other foundation can be laid (1 Cor 3:11)

-Plus Peter was not even the first, or even ever, leader of the Christian Church. James the brother of Jesus was. It is only retroactive Catholic claims, going through the bishop of Rome line of succession, which claimed that Peter was a first Pope. The Jerusalem led by James, then the Antiochan Church founded by Paul, were the “Headquarters” of the Apostolic Christian Church.

-Peter/Cephas was far from a “solid” foundation (Gal 2:9-11)
[34:46] uhhhh... Talk about “twisting Scripture”....This is insane!!!!!! The Bible is unequivocally clear that it is the Church which the “gates of the grave” will not prevail against...straightforwardly meaning/indicating that: even if Jesus was put to death, and also his followers, -as attempted by Satan through the Romans, this Church would not be overcome and ended.
[36:19] A text without its context is only a pretext: The “keys of the kingdom” are the explanations and teachings about the mysteries of the Kingdom of God which Christ had been specially giving to his 12 Apostles for ca. 3 years and which we can read for ourselves in the Gospels. (=Matt 13:10-17). Those mysteries lock or unlock the determinative understandings about how to be acceptable in this kingdom. The keys are the properly understood word of God. Like Jesus, the disciples would reveal it to those who wanted to hear it and conceal it from the unrighteous e.g. Acts 13:40-52; Matt 10:11-15; (=Dan 12:4, 9-10).
            Merely by preaching the word to who was actually willing to hear/accept it, the apostles did this “binding and loosing”. It was a derived authority, and not a fiat one. And those who chose to hear or reject would lead to them determining their fate in the end.

[38:50] No “priests” were ever ordained by the Apostolic Church...that was only a later heretical practice by the Church. This sacramental priesthood thing is a total fabrication by the Catholics with a futile attempt to try to attribute it to Christ and the Apostolic Church, starting with a mystification of the Communion. Catholics should instead learn what it really means to “eat the flesh and drink the blood of “the word of God”: Christ”

[44:00] Vain preoccupation with genealogies....just like the Pharisees...The only lineage that is necessary is a connection to Jesus Christ by teaching and doing what he did...

[46:13] And that is when/why the ROMAN Catholic Church is formed....when it assimilated itself, pointedly ideologically, into/with “converted” Rome. Satan’s trick: If you can’t beat them through persecution, then join them and corrupt them from within...and that was, as prophesied, most successful with the RCC = “Babylon”...

[52:50] Sorry but the Catholic Church has been led into error by all of its popes...The Bible easily reveals that.

[01:00:15] The SDA Church has, and the FSZC Church will have, a comparable Church Denomincation Organizational Structure. Cf. http://njkproject.blogspot.com/2012/04/gods-new-true-remnant-church.html#FSZCmissions

[01:04:10] That anecdote shows you exactly how superstitious the Catholic System is....That rogue priest clearly is not faithful to what they think to be “the one and only true church” but because he was ordained by a collaborating Catholic priest, then whatever he does in his rogue templar religion is still being deemed valid by Catholics. In Biblical Protestantism, Truth is not determined by ceremonies, lineage or ordination pronouncement but by whether or not someone is faithful to the teachings of Christ and the Bible.

RCIA 9: The Catholic Church (...as Prophet)

[01:31] Jesus did no such thing. HE did not set up/apart his twelve apostles as “priests”. There deliberately is not priest position in the NT Church. So Catholics are lying to themselves...

[02:29] A prophet is not synonymous with the NT Church position of a “teacher”. The Bible is also clear about that fact. 1 Cor 12:28-29; Eph 4:11; Acts 13:1 (cf. 2 Pet 2:1) all show that the Holy Spirit gifted position of “prophet” and “teacher” are distinct. What Biblical happens here is that a prophet receives and shares any revelation that God wants to share with His People and a teacher would also incorporate that, as well as other Biblical things in a teaching curriculum for the Church to educate members about the Faith/Truth.

[03:02] Of course the apostles were to be teachers...because they had been first hand students and witnesses of all that Jesus said and did. That does not mean that the gifts of apostle, prophet and teacher are defaultly synonymous. Only is one has the qualifications for each of those gifts can they then be legitimately found in one person.

[08:54] So the Catholic Church is against a homosexual lifestyle...Shhhhhh....don’t tell many of its members who either practice it or advocate it.....

[11:20] According to the standard of Truth, all Catholic Popes taught error... in fact, only when a Pope endeavors to teach what the Bible actually teaches, is he deemed to be in “error”.

This website lists 25 errors of various Catholic Popes.

[29:22] So the only two times that the Pope made declarations on its own was to elevate Mary. And it was purely fabrications to keep the sheeple interested.

[33:38/41:50] “not Adam and Steve”....That’s “blunt” enough already about the official Catholic view.

[35:37] quite telling that the Catholic Church has, as far as I know, never claimed to have had foretelling prophecies...=the genuine/full gift/Spirit of prophecy = “The Testimony of Jesus” (Rev 12:17; 19:10; 22:8-9)

[01:04:50] LOLOLOLOLOL!!!!! Literally in all my years of Christian studies I have never ever heard this claim: SDA’s believe the resurrection was on Saturday...so that is why they go to Church on Saturday. Surely this guy does not believe that. In fact he goes on the mention the 7th day as the actual reason. But talk about bias...This Catholic is so fooled by the Catholics amending of the 4th Commandment to remove the mention of the Seventh Day as Sabbath, Plus the Early Christian false tradition that the Resurrection made Sunday the Sabbath, the he can’t but reason from that completely false premise as to why the Sabbath is observed on the Seventh Day by some Christians...
            Plus another Catholic teacher had stated earlier the historical fact that it was the Earl Church which changed the Sabbath, i.e. after 67 A.D. and that was to distinguish themselves in the eyes of Rome from the now hated and punitively taxed Jews. Surely this teacher/priests knows those facts...So it would all go to substantiate my thesis that, when Catholic have their backs against the wall by encountering a teaching that they cannot disprove as true but that they do not keep, e.g. here the 7th Day Sabbath, thus which “gets under their skin”, then they dissemble by cracking goofy jokes to try to distractingly fool their sheeple...
[01:05:20] Wow this may be the only Catholic who does not know any factual thing about SDAs...Other Catholics I have encounter know to view SDAs as the biggest threat to their Church/Religion. SDAs do not practice Healthy Living (e.g Exercise, Healthy Diet, Healthy Environment, no smoking, etc)...which is now mainstreamed in the (Western) World “in order to cure people of overactive libidos”...but because allows people, as many of them who practice these things show, they can thus live 7-10 healthy more years than the average population.
            Clearly this guy is making up these things to try to keep his sheeple away from ever studying with an SDA....because he knows that they’ll concretely expose his Catholic Church as the Babylon&Beast of Revelation and their Pope as the Man of Sin and AntiChrist... just like Early Reformers did.
            Interesting that he did not even know or think to mention E.G. White....I wonder why???? But he did know the keyly influential leaders of other Denominations

[01:06:05] Catholic “mutated” the Ten Commandments to fit their corrupt theology and dogmas....Even bigger problems than Jehovah Witnesses.

[01:09:10] But that’s the whole thing....Catholicism is not the same as the Apostolic Church. That is a Biblical and Historical Fact. All of its unBiblical teachings came up after the times of the Apostles by misguided Church Fathers.

[01:10:20] LOL...It is the whimsicalness of Church Fathers which leads me to be a Protestant. Reading the Bible leads to seeing the Truth of Protestantism and the Remnant Church.

RCIA 10: The Last Things: Death, Judgement, & Everlasting Life
[00:10] The Catholic’s “4 distinctive Marks” criteria to determine the True Church

One - So any Church that is “united” would qualify....even if it is e.g. 3 like-minded congregations in Maine...Newsflash: Catholicism itself is structurally not even “one” as there are various “branches” with the (even Roman) Catholicism heading.* In fact by allowing itself to have diverging beliefs within also the branches of itself (e.g. some Catholics believe in Evolution, some don’t; some attend Mass every week, some don’t, same goes for confession, contraception, abortion, pre-marital celibacy etc, Catholicism is effectively just as divided as Protestantism. Catholicism prefer the “mall” aspect for Church where there are different stores, including some “anchor” stores, but all under the same roof, while Protestants set up their own standalone stores and storefronts.

So Catholicism claims/thinks to be “one” by not bothering trying to be one/united...Just
let everyone belief and do whatever they think is right in their own eyes....Nice “cooking of the books”....

Holy - Indeed this means: “set apart for a special purpose by and for God”....so really any Church/Denomination can validly claim that about itself...The only way this is a distinguish mark, i.e. one which identifies the one/true and only is if that Church/Denomination is actually doing the sanctifying work of the Bible/NT

“Catholic” - Universal. Any Church that is found throughout the world can claim this...So Catholic have to duke it out with the SDA Church as they are the only two denominations that are in most, if not all, of the recognized countries/territories of the world.

Apostolic - The true definition of “Apostolic” is: if a Church/Denomination today observes what the Apostles/Apostolic Church itself observed (=Scripture)....Catholics (effectively) define “Apostolic” as a mere lineage and so: a Church/Denom that also or instead observes whatever the descendants in that lineage may have claimed to (now) be the Truth (i.e. +Traditions). If Christian Traditions are contrary to the Bible/NT (e.g. Sunday Sacredness), then they are not Christian.
            Case in point, interesting to hear an honest, albeit Spiritually witless [=honest but blasphemously wrong], Catholic claim here* the historically-based fact that Sunday Sacredness is not a matter of Scripture (as it indeed is not found in Scripture), but a matter of (Catholic) Church Authority to, at whatever time it wants to, ‘change whatever times and laws’ (=Dan 7:25)...So indeed, when it became expedient for Christians to not be confused for Jews, Sunday was begun to be observed as the Sabbath, then when the persecution & punitive taxation of Jews ended, both days were now observed until the Catholic Church decided in the Council of Laodicea (370 A.D.) to also adopt Constantine’s Sunday (Sabbatizing) Law and that, by outlawing the Observance of the Sabbath.

-See more of such pompous statements by Catholics e.g. here:

            Clearly the Sabbath was seen as abolished or changed by the Apostolic, because the actually upheld its observance, for also Gentiles, during its 50 A.D. Jerusalem Council (Acts 15:21). It is only when it became a problem due to the conflict between Jews and Romans that Church leaders decided to set it aside. The Catholic Church similarly went on to do the same about the commandment against image worship.

            So the True/Biblical meaning of “Apostolic” is indeed one which still has the same substantive beliefs and teaching as the Apostles did in the NT, and that is summarized by the substantive identifying points that the Bible gives for the True Christian Church (Rev 12:17; 14:12, 19:10; 22:8-9) = Jesus, the 10 Commandments, the Prophetic Testimony/Spirit of Jesus (cf. John 16:8-11)

[01:20] uhhhhhh....The Bible/NT does not teach that the righteous dead immediately go to Heaven..or the unrighteous dead to purgatory [nor Hell] (plus there is no purgatory in the NT...only in Hellenistic Apocryphal Jewish Writings)...
            Take away the teaching of the Immortality of the Soul and Sunday Sacredness, and Catholicism and most of Protestantism, thus “Babylon” is defunct....

[02:40] The Bible’s teaching about the resurrection only at the end is unequivocally clear. Only bad translation from the Hebrew/Greek causes wrong understandings.

[03:30] Biblically no such thing as a “soul”, let alone an “immortal” one....And if a soul was immortal, then it would have had to consciously existed in the eternal past also....but no one recalls things lived/seen/experienced before they were born. If it cannot die, then it can’t ever be dead...
[04:20] In John 5:28-29 Jesus said that some of the dead will be raised in the judgment of the righteous and others in the judgment of the unrighteous (=Dan 12:2). Jesus later revealed in Rev 20:4-6 that there will be a Millennium period in between those two resurrections. And Paul statement in 2 Cor 5:20 actually states that all will appear before the Judgement seat of Christ....not to be judged then, but to receive the reward/punishment of a, clearly already done judgement (cf. Rev 22:12 -Jesus appears to raise the righteous dead (1 Thess 4:14-17) with His reward already with Him...Hence why He will be raising them here...They have already been judged...in the Pre-Advent Investigative Judgement)

[05:15] The concept of Heaven is simple...It literally is, after 1000 years in actually Heaven, living on this Earth, and all that is involved in living on this Earth, then in full perfection, righteousness and sinlessness, without dying. Then add to that the dimension of being able to visit other worlds in other galaxies...And also add to that the HQ of God and His Universe being on this Earth (=Rev 21:1-4ff)

[05:35] Actually not, we will only “perceive” God’s (i.e. the Father’s) Face, not see it, most of the angels (except the 3 Cherubim and 4 Seraphim = 7 “Angels of His Presence” [Rev 8:2]) also don’t see God’s Face, but only “perceive” it. (See Matt 18:10; -check the Greek horao =Matt 5:8; Rev 22:4)
            That is why God (th Father) split/cloned Himself into a distinct (God the Son) Being before creating angels and humans...So that they can have a “face to face” relationship with Him through His Son. God the Father will always dwell in “unapproachable Light”.

[08:54] Not now is there a Hell...Nor will Hell be Eternal when it is executed. The Greek expression translated “eternal” merely indicates and indefinite period of time as “ages of the ages”....So it speaks of a certain period of time within a larger period of time. Hell will only be for a season, probably long, especially since people will be burning in it but will not burn up within a few minutes as natural.

[09:02] Gehenna was (indeed) the garbage burning dump outside of the wall of Jerusalem, which seemed to burn without becoming extinguished as there was always additional garbage to burn.
So it just is a metaphoric/illustrative term for the ultimate place of (sin/sinners) burning up. It is not any place now “in the center of the Earth” or somewhere in space where unsaved people are being burned.

[11:25] Dante’s Inferno is fiction...but manifestly Catholic think that it may be an inspired depiction of Hell...

[12:22] The whole reason for the Great Controversy is that Satan accused God of not allowing His Created Beings to be Free. Well God is showing that this is what such granted Freedom entails. In fact, everything that God has done in this GC has had to include an opportunity for a free choice for or against His will. And people who want to disobey Him will “freely” find a justification to do so...but with consequences.....And that is how Catholics have found “loopholes” to believe all of the unBiblical things that their natural flesh preferred to believe and do instead of obeying what God had said (e.g. instituting Sunday to avoid paying Jewish Taxes; consequence: The Mark of the Beast) = the Mystery of Lawlessness.
[15:40] So it’s Sister Faustina Kowalska who, in 1936 got the Catholic’s inspired vision of Hell

So Biblical Testing (1 Thess 5:19-22) of this purported prophetic revelation:

-Jesus said that the living being = existence consciousness will be destroyed in Hell (Matt 10:28)
=Though a believer may be killed, God preserves their being’s consciousness and restores it to them when they are brought back to life at their resurrection. But, on the other hand, God will be destroying the existence consciousness of the unsaved in Hell. SO that is why He instead should be feared.

-Hell is the “lake of Fire” at the end of time (Rev 20:14-15), not a present place/“chasms”.

            So I cannot see this vision as Biblical. It rather then is a, as strategically patent, partly true/partly false, vision from Satan to actually draw/keep people into his Babylon, the HQ on Earth for his Hell-damning agenda. If he was to give a vision that ‘there is no hell’ the Catholic Church would reject it and it wouldn’t affect atheists. But saying here through Catholics that there is a (present) hell only serve to validate Catholic teaching and draw especially those still on the fence into the Catholic Church, all to fulfill Satan’s final “law-less-ness” rebellion against God and His faithful remnant (Rev 12:17).
            Relatedly, but on the other hand, the 2000+ visions/revelations of Ellen G. White* are all in perfect harmony with the Bible.

[16:20] The Catholic Church has murdered ca. 100,000,000 people...(more than Hitler, Stalin and Moe Tse Tung combined, btw), just because they did not believe in the heresies that it does...but it is proud of not having sent anyone to Hell but leaving that Judgement up to God...So how and why could it have decided that these people deserved to be murdered?????????????????? Does it really believe that God Himself will have no problem with any of the people it had deemed heretics and deserving of death??????????????? As usual, another belief of Catholic which makes no cogent sense....
            Not surprisingly, this all fulfills what Jesus said would be the deluded mentality of these false believers who will be persecuting and murdering His faithful followers....‘They will think that they are offering service to God” (John 16:2, 3)

[17:05] no kidding “purgatory” is not found in the Bible.  The Bible’s “purging” of sins takes place presently, in the Heavenly Sanctuary ministered to by Jesus Christ (e.g. Heb 9:26), and only while the person is alive and confessing and “Sending Up” their sins to be dealt with. There is no second chance after a person dies. That is a doctrine of devils which leads people to die in unsaved states thinking that they have a chance to repent when dead.

[18:37] There is not venial vs. mortal sin...all sin is mortal. Only the free gift of God can save people from any sin. God will not be weighing sins in the judgement..He will be investigating the desire of one’s heart/mind and then will decide if the gift of Christ can be wholly applied to that person. (Rom 6:22-23)
            -Sooooo that is why the Catholic Church does not care if their members come to confession or not...they can choose to be purged in purgatory after they die if they prefer...

[19:14] The “Old” Testament...You mean the books that even the Jewish Canon rejects a Hellenistic perversions and a teaching that Jesus nor any NT Writer wrote about..and in fact is contrary to NT teaching.... How can that begin to be an NT/Christian Truth?????

            And if this book of Wisdom of Solomon is so “obviously” canonical, how come there was so much opposition in/by the Early Church about its canonicity....until 382 A.D.

[19:23] Quite telling that you are confessing that these writings are purely subjective fabrications...Where is the qualifying: Thus saith the Lord. That is why Biblical Jews rejected these fanciful musings.

-So Catholics have also been formulating this dogma of theirs as they went along over the centuries and as late as 1999 and 2011 their popes were still trying to tweak it (e.g. is it a physical place as Dante claimed or merely a Spiritual one)...It’s literally whatever you need it to be. Obviously Dante’s “mountain in the Southern hemisphere” claim could no longer be sustained by the 20th century...

[23:00] Strictly speaking: “The one (=age) about to be, was the possible kingdom of God age, which Christ could have established in the times of First Century Israel. Then would begin a millennium age where/when the wicked would also be alive (cf. Isa 66:23-24)...but those who had refused to heed the Holy Spirit and rejected Christ in that prior/preceding age, would also not be forgiven, i.e. given a mulligan, in the Millennial reign of Christ. It is not speaking of a time after death because that is not a “new age” as it is the same age as the one which those people died in....Not until the (Plan B Emergency Second Coming*) or Temporal Jubilee Millennium** is a new age begun.

Rev 21:23-27 shows that next Millennial Age, when the wicked are also around (cf. Rev 19:15). So Jesus was saying that those who reject the evidence of Him in the preceding age will not have a second chance, while those who did not know or have such an opportunity will then have a chance. They have not rejected the Holy Spirit.
[23:10] That “fire tried gold”, is actually spoken by Peter (1 Pet 1:6-7), and it is in regards to (the proof of one’s) faith. Moreover, it is to occur “now” i.e. in this life, “if necessary”.  So it is not “purging the soul of sins in purgatory upon and after death”. It also is merely a metaphoric expression, not a technical nor theological one. So that is why it is also, but differently used in Wisdom of Solomon. Trying to link those divergent passages together is pure proof-texting eisegesis. Catholicism is systematized proof-texting, which allegorical takes when needed....and appeals to “Deuterocanonical” claims if that idea is not found in the Primary Canonical Bible

[23:45] Neither Luther’s nor Jean Calvin’s wrong understandings of righteousness by faith make the claim of a purgatory either necessary or valid....That’s a straw man claim/argument.

[24:20] The Greeks were renown for their afterlife and eternal soul views....and so it’s not surprising that these Hellenistic Jews incorporated those claims in their musing writings. Jesus also faced such Jews (e.g. the Sadducees) who had such Greek-influenced/corrupted viewed. So that is why those late books are not considered by even Jews....and, for Wisdom of Solomon,  only officially quite late by the, then Roman Catholic Church (i.e. 382 A.D. and forward).
            In fact, it was not until the Council of Trent, in 1546, that the Deuterocanon books were actually fully accepted in the Catholic Church*... And manifestly that was only in order to provide a united front against Protestantism.

[27:33] Comical how Catholic are so fond of the OT whenever it suits their pet doctrine. At the beginning of this reading, it stated that Judas and other kept the Sabbath...So why isn’t that also “Gospel” for the Catholic Church instead of them having changed it to Sunday.... and likewise, why isn’t Genesis 1-11 to be taken as literal.....The whole thing is pure subjective and wreckless “exegesis”...It is “wrongly dividing the word of Truth” especially by taking from words of non-Truth. The last inspired voice to OT Israel was Malachi, as the Jews know, not Judas Maccabees.

[29:32] The suffering and sacrifice of Jesus Christ pays entirely for all and any sin. So it is actually diabolical, not “beautiful”, to claim that God will have to torture people who want to be saved through the fires of a purgatory so that they can be acceptable to Him. That makes a mockery out of the efficacity of the “Lamb of God who takes away the sins (not only/merely venial ones) of the world.
            Again, sin is not a “ledger matter”, but the overall attitude of the heart. Moreover, forgiveness of sin is simple and by faith, and not through priestly confessions nor works of penances...And there is aslo no possible “second chance” in a purgatory for those who were negligent or indifferent to ‘fearfully work out their salvation in this life’. The Catholic’s, really nonchalant, teaching here is literally letting people decide to “take their chances in purgatory’ It actually really only is Catholics who do not want to practice their Catholic faith who are choosing this wait and see (in an afterlife, if any) stance. The Catholic Church is indeed “full”, at least in name only, with such quasi-agnostic aloofly-loitering nominal members, and the Church’s theology is fostering this....Just what Satan would want to have people die in lost conditions.

[31:40] So if/since, according to Catholic fantasy, who are ‘doomed to pass your purgatory purging’, then it just is God taking out his wrath against people who would not have been serious about their salvation before. But the (actual) Bible says that the believer is not subject to God’s wrath!!!!

[32:02] Martin Luther was right on: The practice/teaching of purgatory and “rescuing/assuaging” indulgence purchasing (to fund raise for the St. Peter’s Basilica in Rome, was indeed just a money making scam as it uses a fear of being torments in the fires of purgatory with a sense of guilt on those who are alive and not “helping out” those who are in purgatory....But since that person in purgatory is there by the own consequence of their negligent Spiritual life, why are others to be held responsible for them??
[32:10] LOL...Catholics need to get their story straight. There is this clip on Youtube* of a Catholic berating an SDA in a televised debate/forum because the SDA believed in the literal Second Coming of Christ, while that Catholic was claiming it is all just symbolic statements...Now this Catholic says that Jesus will come back....Evidently this Catholic priest does not know and/or believe that the Catholic Church thinks to be the Second Coming Kingdom “rock” of Dan 2:34-35, 44-45**....What-ever....

** See the actual, i.e. Biblical interpretation of that prophetic prediction in:

[33:25] The Bible calls it “the resurrection of the dead” not “the resurrection of the body” because there is not “immortal soul that needs to be reinstated in a body”

[35:00] Jesus did not really/actually “disappear”...He was merely unseen by those around him. God shut their minds ability to see him. 

[35:49] “The wages of sin is death” (the eternal death of the “Second death” (Rev 20:6))...not immortal living in Hell...

[36:40] Jesus deliberately showed that He was not a spirit after His resurrection, but “flesh & bones” (Luke 24:39-43), so the only solution is that God indeed blinded the eyes of the Disciples from being able to see him at times.

[37:03] No you can’t “agilely bounce around”...the resurrected “flesh & bone” Christ need a cloud to lift him up to Heaven (Acts 1:9) (like the also human Elijah). You all have a very ethereal view of Heaven...
[37:22] “Sophia Loren.. who I still like”...I think the priest just lusted (reminds me of the priest in The Sopranos ...Btw, did you know that priestly celibacy was a ca. 1000 A.D. invention by the Catholic Church leadership to prevent priest leaving of Church property as an inheritance to their family/children...

[38:05] Here’s that “saints necromancy” thing with Catholics...and indeed if the righteous dead are resurrected and in Heaven why can’t they speak to the living....despite what the Bible unequivocally says against speaking with the dead....even a prophet like Samuele. Only Elijah and Moses are shown to have been alive and interacted with Jesus on Earth because Elijah was taken alive to Heaven and Moses was resurrected...All the other dead, except for martyred people* are sleeping unconsciously in their graves until the resurrection at the final day.

[38:10] That’s how Satan will deceive people to believe the lies of Babylon (Rev 16:13-14ff) through such Spiritualistic apparitions such as with the supposed ascended Mary...Notice how he justifies Marian Apparitions by citing Jesus..Of course Jesus is alive and in Heaven...Mary is not...she’s dead and buried....
            “Seeing dead relatives”...It’s full blown Spiritualism now...Saul saw Samuel...but it was not from God....Biblical Truth about the sleeping state of the dead shows that these miracles are acts of demonic spirits impersonating dead relatives/people...

[38:34] That’s (rather) the demonism of Catholicism...Satan has been preparing you all through false and spurious understandings to easily fall for this deception.

[40:35] LOL...If someone in purgatory “can’t help themselves” how the hell are they supposed to be able to “help those alive on Earth”?!?!?!!?????????

[43:18-56:31] Out of Body Experiences/Near-Death Experiences prove nothing. The real study is what did all these people claiming this have in common....Probably Catholicism and its theology...But seriously it is just like a lucid dream...Like when someone is lucidly about to fall asleep with ambient noise/activity (e.g. TV/Radio) around them...

RCIA 11: Mary and the Saints

Veneration of “Saints”
[00:57] LOL...I never knew that the terms “Church Militant” and “Church Triumphant” were used outside of SDA circles....Manifestly the were repossessed and properly applied by EGW from Catholics (LDE 59-61). Of course there is no Biblical such things as the “Church Suffering/Purified” i.e. in a supposed Purgatory.
            So, I ask...do Catholics believe that the suffering of people being purified in purgatory is as painful as the people in Hell....if not, then why not take your chances indeed...as most Catholics are doing...

[01:15] The Apostles/NT calls all believers on Earth “saints”...Look it up....That’s because they beleived that faith in Jesus Christ completely purified, = justified people from sin and as they (directly) ask God through their lone mediator/intercessor Jesus Christ for forgiveness of sins. #TheGospel(thatPaulPreached)

[01:34] So...you also know that....We are not “saints in the making”...we are ‘saints in the Beloved’...

[01:44] Interesting way to put it: “Canonization”: and it means just what it implies:

            “The Church's official recognition of sanctity implies that the person is now in Heaven and that he may be publicly invoked and mentioned officially in the liturgy of the Church, including in the Litany of the Saints.”

            Ergo for Catholics these people are “as good as the Bible”. So Catholics are setting themselves up to believe the doctrines of demons appearing as these supposed saints in/from Heaven teaching “anathema” things and false gospels.

[03:05] What about OT dead people....When do they get to go to Heaven...How come Catholics only honor/venerate people who have lived/died after 31 AD....Is King David in Heaven?? Peter in the Bible said “no” (Acts 2:29ff)

[03:44] Why make “Basilica” shrines of the burial places of the righteous dead if you believe that are alive and well in Heaven...Why this “cult of death” actually??!...Why else (John 8:44).....

[04:15] Where in the Bible do you have permission to interact with the dead???? (Supposing that these dead people have been resurrected). The Bible copiously says to not communicate with the dead and that they never return to take part in anything on Earth’ (e.g. Eccl 9:5-6) . That as good Old Testament as your claim for 2Macc and Wisdom of Sol. For your heretical purgatory belief

[04:46] “not worshiping” .... not smershiping.... This “honoring” process is known as a “cultus* and cultus means “worship”..... Indeed these people are “venerated in the liturgy” = “worship”. “Erecting an altar over the saint's tomb” is also (formally) making it an act of worship. “Invoking” (a.k.a. conjuring) the intercession of saints in the “Litany of the Saints” prayer** right along side praying to God is also an act of worship. Jesus did not say to pray to “Our Father” and all of the saints of the OT...including His mother....

            An actual “litany of “saints/heroes” died in the Bible, both in Old Testament (cf. Heb 11) and also in the New Testament....From all of the Apostles, to Paul to Stephen to James the brother of Jesus to John the Baptist (to let’s even say Mary) etc....and no where in the NT do you see anyone in the leadership of the Church right through ca. 95 A.D. when the last Apostle John died of a call or instruction to “venerate those dead saints” and ask them to intercede for you when praying...That is all a Catholic, quasi-paganistic, fabrication. Instead the Bible is copiously and consistently clear that Christians are to only pray to and through Jesus Christ ‘our one and only mediator’ (1 Tim 2:5) in this New Covenant (Gal 3:19-20; Heb 8:6; 9:15; 12:24 =no longer through many earthly priests as for the Old Covenant) with the ‘Holy Spirit of Truth’ Himself being the ‘only and forever “Helper”’ (John 14:16), -the One who will be helping and perfecting out our prayers by interceding for us (Rom 8:26-27).
            And whatever this Spirit [and not “saints (supposedly) in Heavens”] informs/impart to Believers, it will be in perfect harmony with what Jesus [and not remotely “Mary” i.e. in (supposed) apparitions] has already revealed. (John 14:26; 15:26).

            It would be interesting to find out when was the first Catholic saint canonized as it will show when that practice started....It surely did not start in NT Church times. Interestingly, the first “Universal” canonization by a Pope was in ca. 993 A.D.
Thesis: Since “The first persons honored as saints were the martyrs.” This practice probably began after Christianity was legalized in Rome, so in ca. 313 AD+ and the Church wanted to remember the martyrs.

The ironic thing is that the martyrs, are “compensatorily” rewarded with a earlier (=“better”) resurrection sometime after their death and are in Heaven.* But they do not serve as intercessors or mediators. For every truth of God, Satan does have his counterfeit.

[06:15] Since the “Christian devotion to Mary goes back to the 2nd century”, then it clearly was not something done by the NT Apostles.
            The Apostolic Church was very early corrupted with indeed the “mystery of lawlessness” (2 Thess 2:7) led by the man of lawlessness (2 Thess 2:2 =the bishop of Rome) already at work in the days of the Apostles. The entire purpose of Satan in these Catholic heresy is to try to lead and convince people that they are above the Bible and could choose to do whatever they want to with it. E.g changing and amending the Ten Commandments.
[07:00] So if/as 1.285B Catholics are praying every day to “810”* listed saints...that means that each of these “resurrected humans” are capable of hearing at least ca. 1.6 million prayers per day = 66,100 per hour or, as humans in heaven (likely) still need to sleep, 99,150 per 16 awaken hour = 1,652 per {16h} minute = 28 per {16h} second = These saints would have to be on a God-like omniscient spectrum to be able to process all of these prayer requests...if they are so occupied for every waking second of their Heavenly life..then when and how do they pray for those requests....The whole claim is indeed absurd and inherently needs to involve attributes for these humans which only belong to God. Even guardian angels have to be assigned to one person, and they do so in a team of two, because they too are not omniscient.

[09:20] This saints veneration tradition is just not Biblical...It has not mention nor precedence in the Bible....The only person in the Bible who prayed to a dead “saint” was the Holy Spirit devoid King Saul necromantically working with a witch to try to get advice from Samuel....Catholics are doing the same proscribed necromantic thing. The Bible has not given them that mandate.

Also see the prior commenting about the Catholic Veneration of Mary made above during the Becoming Catholic (RCIA) #3 - "Start the Story Part Two" session.

[13:52] Uhhhh...nice try...and this is the perfect demonstration that Catholic Clergy, though highly educated, e.g. in OT Hebrew and NT Greek, have no qualm about setting proper exegesis aside to claim their pet unScriptural traditions:
            “Rejoice” is in the Second person singular” i.e. “You (sing) rejoice”.  It’s “object” is “you (having been) favored one...i.e. Mary...So it is not, as claimed by this priest: “also a wider greeting to all of creation...including the angels, and OT dead”...Just get the exegesis right, remain faithful to the literal meaning and you won’t be Catholic anymore....But of course, by such ~allegorizing claims, Catholics are actually forging their own Scripture...which of course they fundamentally believe they have the right to do.

[14:21] “Full of Grace” is not an accurate translation....and “o daughter” is not in the Greek text at all, nor even implied....

[14:35] a pluperfect form of the Greek verb here, rather than merely a perfect would have plausibly involved a notion of “absolutely full”...This also is a passive meaning someone else is doing the “favoring” action: “Having been favored’ even, to incorporate the participle sense: “having been made favored”...Again, as already discussed in detail earlier, that is from the special favor given to the inherently sinner (=defective) Mary to be the bearer of the sinless Son of God.
            So, since this exegetical fact complete debunks the Catholic premise for their claims about Mary, are they now going to make the correction and align themselves with what the Bible actually teaches....of course not...because by now there literally have been a mountain of formal Mariology claims* errors stacked up on that foundational error.... “and the Catholic Church never makes an error”..even when they make an error...But you may be right, it clearly is God’s will that you make and believe these lies...in order to fulfill His Judas-like “son of perdition” antiChrist prophecies (2 Thess 2:3-4, 8, 11-12)....

            That is the Truth on such matters, and you all in Babylon have been warned...As with the First Century Jewish Leaders, it is only your Spiritual Historical and Traditions Pride which is keeping you all from submitting to what the Bible actually says.

[15:10] LOL if you are going to use allegories to determine doctrine, then you cannot pick and choose what you want from the prior story....(btw I though Adam and Eve’s story was itself an allegory). In Gal 4:21-31 Paul uses an OT allegory based on the Story of Abraham vs. Hagar and Sarah and the true son of promise...not to determine NT teaching/doctrine (i.e. “Mary must be sinless unlike Eve”), as you are trying to do here, but to illustrate an already established reality....and he did not change the facts of the OT story when illustrating the NT teaching.
            So in your case....Mary must also be a sinner...as Eve chose to be. As Paul says, the seed of the woman was born “according to the flesh” (Rom 1:3; 9:5) Mary literally was that “flesh” and it was sinful flesh...The only sinless person in all of this was Jesus Christ.

[18:44] Catholic “Dogmatic “ belief = ‘we have no Biblical support for this belief, but YOU MUST believe it’...
            Generally related...just skimming through the rest of the RCIA session titles here, quite telling that the Catholic Church has nothing to say about Bible prophecy...because they can’t.....as in: they dare not alert their sheeple to this....because, as the Reformers repeatedly showed, the Catholic Church fulfills Bible Prophecy....and not in the “Christ” way...but “in His place” #Anti-Christ

[19:08] LOL nice muddling attempt to try to explain away the fact that Mary considered GOD [i.e the Father, not even Jesus per se] her savior (Luke 1:47)...with sone “special” nothingness...Actually sounds like you are now trying to claim that Mary also is Eternal....at least in a Spiritual sense...Won’t be too long before that becomes Catholic Dogma and Mary is therefore to be worshipped as God..even the way God was able to procreate humans...since you also believe that ‘Genesis’s Creation account is merely an allegorical  “myth”’...

[20:36] Who the Hell ever said that the plan of Redemption had anything contributive to do with Mary...She was the mother of the human nature of Jesus not “God”...It would be like claiming that a woman provides the male chromosomes in birth....She doesn’t the male does...and in this case, it was God the Holy Spirit.
Ron Wyatt found that Jesus only had one male chromosome to determine the male gender.

[22:28] “mother” here is merely a technical identification, not an indication that Mary contributed to the Divine nature of Jesus.

[24:21] LOL...Yeah...as Jesus said to Mary: “Woman, what have you to do with me??” (John 2:4 KJV) I.e. with his Messiahship....Mary role was merely to bear Jesus and raise him up in a Biblical way....Then He took over His Messiah and Divine mission and as the Gospels show, Mary had no clue what He&God was/were doing....She even thought He had ‘lost his mind”...
            You all Catholics are patent experts at making a big deal about what the Bible cares nothing about (check out literally e-v-e-r-y-t-h-i-n-g you do, teach and practice)....Just like your Pharisee forefathers (Matt 23:24)

[24:55] That’s fresh/new/good thus unfermented grape juice (=wine)

[26:00] uhhhh...no...The Bible clearly states in John 2:4b that Jesus did not want to start doing miracles, thus revealing “signs” of his Messiahship (John 2:11), before his “hour/time”...which He knew, from prophecy, -as discussed here*, was supposed to be for 3 years...from Passover to Passover. Jesus did not want to attract this attention to Himself before the set time allocated by God as, as seen in Nazareth (Luke 4:16-30) claiming to be the (Divine) Messiah could be a death sentence....Just (properly) Read the Bible Catholics....

[26:10] Yes...‘Jesus was a brat’... (fancifully) just like you....LOL....nah..Unlike you Catholics, Jesus was concerned with being most faithful to remain in the revealed will of God.

[28:14] LOL...SO this is your Bible basis for you “Mediatrix* Intercession” dogma....What about the “Mary Ignoramus Recedes & Impedes” teaching from Mark 3:21 cf. 3:32-34??????????!

* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mediatrix [29:59] ...of course....

[29:14] For Mary to “know our needs better than we do” she would have to be omniscient....But that of course is no problem with you Catholics because, by also having given her the titles of “Advocate” and “Helper” you already have given her titles and functions which belong to God the Holy Spirit, and God the Son (respectively)
            ...Plus the people had just said that they were running out of wine....how the Hell is that supposed to mean that ‘Mary knew the needs of those people better than they did’?????? And if you weasely try to claim that you meant: ‘Mary knew “better” in regards to who to ask for a solution to the need better than they/we did/do’...then, sorry, Christians already know exactly who to ask for help when in need: Jesus Christ...through the Helping of the Holy Spirit...Jesus is our only Advocate to God.....(Mary is dead and burred)

[30:09] When you take a man/woman and give them titles, prerogatives and duties of God, you can deny it all you want, but you are setting up an idol...and lo and behold, you do make statues of Mary and bow down before them.....You Catholics are deludedly insane!!!!!......No wonder the Bible amply warns about you...because, you’ll once again, just as stone-facedly resumes to sadistically torturing and murdering people who do not believe you cockamanie B.S.....especially if your dear “Mother of God” appears in a vision and tells you to do so.... #SATANIC

Siblings of Jesus
[31:12] If those brothers and sisters of Jesus were, as you supposed (by the way, that is a secondary issue in that Mark 3 passage), the children of Joseph from a previous marriage, then how come there is absolutely no mention of them in any of the nativity/early childhood passages of Jesus...as if Joseph and Mary then only one 1 child...and then had at least 5 more later (Mark 6:3: Matt 13:55-56; Gal 1:19; 1 Cor 9:5)...Another B.S. claim by Catholics...but since the Church has “dogmatically” claimed that Mary never had sex (why the Hell not????) then they cannot dare now claim otherwise... #ComedyOfErrors

[31:48] “Old English = “cousins”...Nice try hoodwinking Bob...LOL...The (esp. NT) Greek distinctly instead has anepsios [#431] for cousins...James (Gal 1:19) and Jude (Jude 1:1) were Jesus’ blood (younger, half-)brothers.

The Greek also has distinct terms/expressions for:
nephew: The Greek (and Hebrew) states this as “son of brother” (Gen 12:5; 14:12)
brother-in-law: Gen 38:8; Deut 235:5, 7 actually do not make mention of a “brother-in-law” term so there is no “adelphos” translation for that there.
son-in-law: nymphios (Neh 13:28 LXX)

Same thing for sister, mother:

sisters/mothers-in-law: see Matt 10:35|Luke 12:53; Mark 1:30|Luke 4:38

and collectively:
relatives: suggeneia & [#4772 & #4773] (e.g. Acts 7:14; 10:24)

So this desperate claim does not begin to fool informed people...When the Greek says brother or sister, in a non-Spiritual context, it means “blood brothers/sisters”

[32:13] WOW....did you just claim that Jesus did not have brothers or sisters because “We know that”...Talk about loopingly circular....Of course you think you “know that” because some Pope “ex-cathedra” declared that ‘Mary was a perpetual virgin’ and he surely cannot have said something wrong...Good luck with that self-handcuffing....You should have first learned to properly/exegetically study the Bible before making you “infallible/inerrant” claims...

[32:43] What “neighbors”????...that’s just your desperate claim....

[32:51] If the Mary of Matt 27:55 was supposed to be Mary the wife of Clopas of John 19:25 and she was supposed to be the mother of the James and Joseph mentioned back in Matt 13:55...then what happened to “Simon and Judas” in Matt 27:55....There are 3 Mary’s mentioned at the cross...Newsflash people in the Bible had very common names...So both Mary the Mother of Jesus and Mary the wife of Clopas could have had sons named James and Joseph....but Mary the mother of Jesus would have had two additional sons: Simon and Judas.

[33:03] Fact: James the son of Zebedee was not Jame the Just, the Brother of Jesus, who wrote the book of the Bible.

[33:44] Newflash: “his mother’s sister” in John 19:25 easily could be a distinct, here unnamed, person than: “Mary the wife of Clopas” just like “the mother of the sons of Zebeedee” in Matt 27:55 is namelessly cited.

[34:54] Unlike the disciple John, Jesus’ other brothers did not then believe in him, only James, then Jude (=Joseph), after the resurrection. So, as per Mark 3:34, Jesus entrusted his mother to an actual, i.e. Christianity-believing “brother”.

[36:40] ...and Jesus still ignored his beckoning blood mother, brother and sisters...because He knew the purpose of their visit.

            You take your claims and arguments to a court of law against Mary ever having any other child, or even Joseph having any other children, and I take my counter claims and arguments of all of the above exegetically-supported, and any objective jury will always side with my side as being the one with the preponderance of evidence....Fact is, Catholics “cannot” believe that Mary had additional children, or even sex, because some Pope dogmatically claimed this to be the case and he cannot dare go back on that claim or else: there goes its “church of cards”...
            Plus Catholic “know” that Mary never had any additional children, nor sex..circularly from its dogmatic claims...well through the Spirit of Prophecy, I “know” that potentially ambivalent Biblical information/data/statements on this issue should be seen as pointing to Jesus having had blood siblings...because EGW saw in prophetic vision that Jesus’s siblings, Mary’s children, (post their return from their Egypt flight), kept on teasing and bothering their saintly brother Jesus: Read: Chap. 9 “Days of Conflict” in The Desire of Ages (pp. 84-92).

“ Jesus loved His brothers, and treated them with unfailing kindness; but they were jealous of Him, and manifested the most decided unbelief and contempt. They could not understand His conduct. Great contradictions presented themselves in Jesus.”


“Jesus was misunderstood by His brothers because He was not like them. His standard was not their standard. In looking to men they had turned away from God, and they had not His power in their lives. The forms of religion which they observed could not transform the character. They paid "tithe of mint and anise and cummin," but omitted "the weightier matters of the law, judgment, mercy, and faith." Matthew 23:23. The example of Jesus was to them a continual irritation.”

            -I’ll thetically grant you all Catholics this however, based on the SOP statement: “His brothers, as the sons of Joseph were called, sided with the rabbis,” (DA 86.2*) that at least two brothers of Jesus, namely James and Joseph were his half brothers...I.e., as per my working thesis: Joseph was previously married to the “Mary” who later became the wife of Clopas after she and Joseph had divorced [perhaps because she burned the supper one day (as were the whimsical customs of the day then...which is why Jesus spoke against it Matt 19:1-9)] and they had James. So that’s how that “Mary” was the mother of James and Joseph (Matt 13:55; 27:56; = “James the less and Joses” in Mark 16:1; cf. 15:40, 47; Luke 24:10). James, having become later a follower of Jesus, was the one mentioned as: the “Lord’s [half-]brother” (Gal 1:19). His full brother Joseph did not ever become a Christian. And then Jude (not to be confused with Judas (Matt 13:55) was later born to that Mary from her husband then Clopas and that is how Jude the epistle writer was the (half-)brother of James (Jude 1:1; i.e. from the same mother Mary (of [now] Clopas) but had no blood relation to Jesus. But the “Joseph, Simeon, Judas” and the sisters could all, or some, easily be Mary the Mother of Jesus’s own children with Joseph and so Jesus’s siblings. One or both of the sisters may also have been half-sister (DA 90)
            The absence of the half-siblings in various early childhood stories can be that they actually lived with their remarried mother Mary, and not with Joseph..And their interacting mention with Jesus in the SOP could be, in the case of the half-siblings, because they lived in the same town/village and so interacted with their half-brother Jesus almost every day

* Cf. “The sons of Joseph were far from being in sympathy with Jesus in His work. The reports that reached them in regard to His life and labors filled them with astonishment and dismay. ”...
“His brothers heard of this, and also of the charge brought by the Pharisees that He cast out devils through the power of Satan. They felt keenly the reproach that came upon them through their relation to Jesus. They knew what a tumult His words and works created, and were not only alarmed at His bold statements, but indignant at His denunciation of the scribes and Pharisees. They decided that He must be persuaded or constrained to cease this manner of labor, and they induced Mary to unite with them, thinking that through His love for her they might prevail upon Him to be more prudent.  {DA 321.1-2}”        

So, in summary, I can concede that the half-brothers of Jesus were also called his “brothers” and this could have been at least two (the sons of Joseph with Mary the later wife of Clopas*)...but the other two, and some if not all of the cited “sisters” would have been Mary’s own children, thus Jesus’s full siblings.

* I would claim that once a divorce was granted in these days, there were no longer any mentions of the former couple as having been husband and wife, hence “Mary the wife of Clopas” vs. “Mary the former wife of Joseph”...if not merely for being able to more easily/readily identify that Mary then by referring to her current husband.
[37:50] ...Whatever...LOL...more Mary dogma fabrications....

[40:47] Rev 12's woman is not Mary...it is a symbol the Enduring Israel Church, from its OT times through the NT, through its perversion as the Protestant Church when in that wilderness by it adhering to Catholic Church teachings...and is only survived by its offspring “Remnant” (Rev 12:15-17)

[44:03] There were 9, not “10” Roman Emperors between the birth of Christ (8B.C.) and the Fall of Jerusalem (70 A.D.). “Ten” is another Preterist canard.

[47:14] “The Rosary” = Vain repetition prayers...clearly proscribed, and as paganistic, by Jesus (Matt 6:7)...

[48:03] LOL you dare appeal to the practices of Eastern Meditation for endorsing support...HAVE YOU NO SHAME??!....Of course not... (Dan 7:8)

[56:15] Why is the Catholic Church ‘afraid of believing Marian apparitions’???
[56:20ff] The “Mary of Guadeloupe” apparition, nor any other Marian sighting, prove anything...That’s just, -like Saul and the Witch of Endor’s apparition of a dead Samuel, Satan’s way of fastening you all pompously obstinate Babylonians” in your pet heresies (~Deut 13:1-5; cf. Rev 16:13-14)

Truth about “Mary, the Mother of Jesus” Seminar:
with the titles:

01 Biblical Portrait Of Mary
02 The Cult of The Virgin Mother
03 Mary The Rival of Jesus
04 The Immaculate Deception
05 The Myth of Apostolic Succession
06 Peter And The Rock
07 The Final Dogma
08 The Ecumenical 'Mary'

RCIA 12: Introduction to Sacraments, Baptism and Confirmation

[00:35] The “Apostle’s Creed” is not a genuine thing...It was not ‘composed by the 12 Apostles each contributing one line’...plus it is not the limit of what Christians are to believe about the New Testament/Bible...but just an expression of the foundational basis.

[07:50] Church “sacraments” are not “channels of grace”...They are just external demonstrations of the inner faith...It is by Faith that the Believer obtains Grace....nothing more, nothing less, and definitely not by “sacramental works”...

[10:50] Jesus saying: ‘let the children come unto me” does not mean that they should be baptized...He did not baptize them...There is no explicit example in the Bible of someone being baptized without their knowing consent...Babies cannot consent...
[11:22] You cannot know “what a baby want”..Case in point, how many of your Catholic Children end up staying in the Church....You only baptize babies because you think that God Himself is dumb to deny a child salvation if they have not had your “holy water” poured on them...indeed as if whatever they actually want has no determination about salvation, but your superstitious water is what is determinative. Again, cheapening the Grace of God, and Defaming/Blaspheming His Just Character with cheap tricks and works...Patent Catholicism....
            It will shock you to see the billions of aborted infants in Heaven...because God does not depend on Holy Water sprinkling to save an innocent person.

[14:00] What are YOU talking about “7 days of Creation”...I thought it “mythically” was 7 periods of billions of years...Make up your DAMNED mind....

[17:15] There is no instruction in the Bible to give dying people extreme unctions...

[17:23] Since not everyone gets married, indeed as Jesus and the Apostles recommended to some, then that shows that it is not necessary to have all of those sacraments in order to be saved.

[21:20] None of these practices for baptism is in the Bible....Plus do Catholics even baptize by immersion??

[36:03] Literally using oil from OT times...of course, Catholics are stuck in the Spiritually immature Old Covenant of tutoring works.....Grow up already.... This is what Paul was talking about, in regards to returning into bondage instead of the Freedom provided by Christ...

[40:45] LOL..Catholics have made their own Ten Commandments...and they do think that they are “God on Earth”
[38:17]/[41:16] So, if I get it right, Catholics have replaced “strength/courage” in Isa 11:2 with “piety”...How the Heck????? That does not begin to exegetically compute....The strength/courage God calls for is to do the right thing.  Clearly, it is just so that their sheeple will “humble” themselves to just do whatever rote thing they tell them to do...(e.g. “kiss the Crucifix” #pagan, make the sign of the cross...with holy water #superstitious) genuflecting #totheiridols/images)...
            ....Ohhh but wait...It only is worse...and only as Catholics can make things worse....”strength” is actually their “fortitude”...But/So they have actually “ADDED” out of thin air a seventh gift: “piety”....I guess they were too exegetically and Spiritual dense to realize that a Seventh Gift of the Spirit was the firstly stated: Spirit of the Lord (Isa 11:2 = Isa 61:1 = Luke 4:18)...So these Magoo geniuses looked at that list and thought it was missing one gift as, as per their blindness,  only 6 gifts had been listed...So they, as always thinking that they are more intelligent than God (as “Lucifer” did)  took it upon themselves to add to the Bible (albeit not literally, i.e. in their NAB/O, DRA versions) and cite one more....not surprisingly, one which makes their sheeple “humbly” subservient to whatever they tell them to do... ....u-n-r-e-a-l...You just can’t make this up....
            Are they even aware how Isa 11:2-3 applies to the 7 Spirits of the Little Lamb of Rev 5:6...of course not as they are Biblically incompetent/immature... Here is what these Spiritual Gifts Biblically are, mean and apply to:

            But I agree, you do have to have ‘an imposed spirit’ i.e. be brainwashed, to agree to do their rote rituals....

[42:37] ....uhhh that’s not the order that the Bible cites these gifts...You all only cite them in your self-serving order to make your subjective claims...

[42:56] ...speaking of ‘knowing to know when something doesn’t sound right’: me learning the Bible from Catholics is like a Graduate School student enrolling in kindergarten....

[46:30] Here is what Catholics should crucially seek to have understanding that leads to wisdom; Rev 13:9-10; 13:18; 17:19...That’s their whole ballgame right there!!!! Know this and you’ll know never to join “Babylon”...

[46:50] LOL..How would this priest ‘surely know what married couples (can) experience’

RCIA 13: The Holy Eucharist

[20:38] ...That was Jesus’ point exactly...of those many professors, those who were only after him “because of the loaves and the fishes” jumped on this “hard saying” to find a way out when they realized that this following of Jesus was not going to be as materially straightforward as they were looking for. So Jesus’ statements was for the purpose of winnowing these spurious followers away....If they were serious about being Christ’s disciples, at the very least, they would have ask him to explain Himself...But by instead immediately jumping to condemning Him, they showed that they were not really serious about being His disciples.

Indeed, this incident takes place in ca. March 30 A.D. It is the start of the final year of Christ’s 3-year public ministry. By then Jesus has said and done much and people have already heard and known what it would mean to be His disciples (e.g. Matt 13; cf. Mark 8:34-38)...And likely many people had opted not to do so..but here/now, upon Him having made that Feeding of the 5000+ miracle, there then is a sudden rush of people who are wanting to follow Him...So Jesus takes that opportunity to express His pertinent teaching on what it means to follow Him, but in “hard” concealing figurative expressions..and as intended, the many false followers just resume their prior non-interest and take this opportuning “out” and leave...

[22:18] ...So...Genesis 1-11 is non-literal and allegorical but bread and wine in John 6 is supposed to be literally the flesh/body and blood of Jesus Christ...And Catholics are the ones going around denouncing as ‘alarmingly dangerous’ people who have fundamentalist takes of the Bible....Talk about textbook: “projectionism”....

‘Eating the body of Jesus’ and ‘drinking His blood’ is: ‘living by every word the He, the “word of God made flesh (i.e. “demonstrated/revealed”), the NT manna (cf. Rev 2:17) ; what He has pivotally taught and done (Matt 26:63-66 = John 6:51); and drinking His blood is accepting to lay down your life like He did. (Cf. Rev 12:11)... That’s what John 6 is all about...

Plus Jesus explicitly said to do feet-washing when taking communion..but of course Catholics do not do what Jesus actually said to do...Btw foot-washing is also symbolic of being humbly serviable to one another.

[23:11] Figures of Speech are not determined by who says it...It is determine by considering the statement itself. It is easy to see and understand that Jesus was here speaking in symbols....Indeed the Early Church also believed that until ca. the 300-400's when John Chrysotom pulled off this slight of mouth sophistry and claimed this was literal.
            The Genesis Creation account is clear about the 24 hour days and God speaking things into organized existence....Your idolatrous deference to so-called science is completely misguided as you clearly don’t know how unscientific the theory of Evolution is...It is merely a bunch of incoherent assumptions...and advanced science has repeatedly exposed how these theories are non-scientific. Do see this seminar ‘For Your information’ about ‘Science vs. “Scientism”*’:

* I.e. excessive belief in the power of scientific knowledge and techniques

[26:03] I think that Luke’s (Luke 22:20) and Paul’s (1 Cor 11:25) rendering of that statement of Jesus show that is merely representative and not literal. “This cup is the new covenant in My Blood” and not: “This cup contains my blood for the New Covenant” The Cup was merely to be a commemorating representation of His spilled blood.

[27:48] The hang up by Catholics over this issue is so useless...If there actually is a hocus pocus “miracle” that occurs when the communion is blessed before being eaten...Then even non-Catholic Christians would have that being done. To the Catholic and to the non-Catholic, the bread and the wine/grape juice is still exactly the same before and after being blessed....Which is actually the proof the NO MIRACLE has taken place here as these would have substantively changed, (like the water turned into wine at Cana).
            Catholics believe, i.e. have faith, that a miracle is taking place, and Protestants do not believe this, and the result is still the same: no change in substance whatsoever....
            And if Jesus had done a “trans-substantiation” miracle Himself, as He indeed could, then the disciples would surely have exclaimed out loud that: they are drinking blood and eating human flesh...But Jesus did no such thing...because He did not mean any such literal thing...

CASE CLOSED!!                 

[31:22] Jesus was crucified in 31 A.D., not 33 A.D.

[34:24] The Bible is clear: we “remember the sacrifice of Jesus through the communion” We do not ‘sacrifice the Son of God all over again’... That is contrary to the “once and for all” sacrifice of Christ. (Rom 6:10; Heb 10:10; 1 Pet 3:18).  Jesus is now applying the merits of that sufficiently lone sacrifice...but of course Catholics and their priestly ministering falsehoods are eclipsing that Heavenly Work of Christ...as prophesied (Dan 8:10-13)...But that Truth was indeed restored in 1844 A.D. (=Dan 8:14)...The “more sure prophetic word” once again exposes Catholic claims as unScriptural.

[35:00] So your belief here is based on Aquinas’ philosophying derived from the pagan Aristotle...all to try to explain why the bread and the wine is not looking nor tasting like human flesh and blood....Got it...
-That is precisely how&why that First Beast of Rev 13:1-10, =the Roman Catholic Church/Holy Roman Empire, has “the body/the likeness of a leopard (=Greece Dan 7:6, 17;)...Because it bases many of its rationalized-traditions teaching/belief on Greek Ideology (here philosophy)

[40:09] B.S.
[40:56] No kidding the so-philosophied “accidence” doesn’t change....but that just not how Jesus performed miracles...You all are just deluding yourselves due to the incontrovertible objective reality here...

[41:18] LOL...I think you have it backwards here...It is your so-called “accidence” (i.e. type of bread/wine) which changes...in your mind...As you think that this now is “human-flesh bread” and “human-blood wine”; but the bread and wine “substance” remains the same as objectively seen and tasted

[41:40] Right, the Early (i.e. Apostolic) Church didn’t resort to philosophy....because they didn’t have a reason to make such an appeal to explain something that they did not even believe what happening.

[42:35] Wow...It took ca. 1200 years before you (officially) invented your transubstantiation claim...Talk about “post-Apostolic”...

[45:51] Protestantism and Biblical Christianity did not end with Luther and Lutherans...they just paved the way to even more advanced and purer understandings of the New Testament Faith....So always comparing things with the Lutheran Church is substantively useless. And by being the first formal Protestant “offshoot”, Lutheranism may indeed be the closest Protestant Denomination to Catholicism....That is not the final word about Protestantism.

[47:00] Orthodox are not Protestants....

RCIA 14: The Mass

[06:00] Why is the Catholic Church so hung up with it Latin Translation...Talk about a ‘translation of a translation’...No wonder they are so skewed up....Try to translate the Greek and Hebrew correctly instead...

[12:01] fine... Catholics don’t read the Bible unless they are in Church....if they even go to Church: Ergo: Catholics don’t read the Bible...Seriously, I would like to see the result of such a survey of Catholics

[14:10] Advanced Protestants don’t corporately read the Bible in such wooden/set/schedule cycles...but as the Holy Spirit is leading that local congregation week to week

[14:20] WHY THE HELL DO MASS HAVE TO HAVE A SET ORDER...Unlike Protestant service which is more of a logical flow, this here seems, by its rigidness, purely ritualistic...as if, if you do not do it in this order, then God will reject the worship....
            In fact, Protestant worship order is indeed so “natural/logical” that I have never seen a session to explain its order...
            And Protestant certainly do not need a “liturgy book”* to make sure to say the same words during worship....That’s pagan...No wonder Catholic Churches are empty...

[18:36] Yes, of course You Catholics use incense just like the Jewish did in the Old Covenant #Retarded....Jesus has all of the incense He needs for HIS (and His Alone) New Covenant Heavenly Priestly Ministry (Rev 8:2-5)...but keep insisting on obscuring it with your man-made priesthood

[19:05] “Spiritually mature” Christians do not need such object permanence pedagogics such as incense to ‘know that their prayers are going up to God...They know so...BY FAITH!!! Seriously, what is so hard to understand, OLD Covenant rituals were all for people who were not in a covenant of Faith....

[23:29] Just skimming through the ritualistically boring missal....It really took a miraculous intervention of God for, especially formerly-Priest Reformers like Martin Luther to literally “snap out” of this hypnotizing ritualism and realize that this is not of God....This is literally like calling someone on the phone every week and they just read you a booklet of pre written statements....no matter what is actually going on in their life. God/Jesus just wants to have a candid and honest conversation....He Himself made sure He fulfilled any ceremonial ritual that God had prescribe for the Old Covenant.....Move on.....
            But of course, for you all, it is people who obey the 4th Commandment (your 3rd since you’ve also messed that up) who have issues....
            In the most Spiritually Advanced Christian Denomination: the Fellowship of Sabbatarian Zionistic Christianaires (FSZC)*, there is some much that is known and understood about the Bible that there is no space to waste in ritualistic repetitions....

[23:51] Priest just “blessed” someone sneezing...like ‘she had just released a demon spirit through her nostrils’...

[25:33] Do Catholic have a hymnal, btw...or is it only the undecipherable Barocque Chanting of monks that is allowed in you all Church????....

LOL half the songs are about Mary....of course..... “Aaaaaave Maaaaariiiii-iiiiyaa”!!

About Hymn #65 & #89 Mary is neither “Queen” of Heaven or Earth...That would be incestuous as Jesus is King....and the only “Queen” this Lamb wants is from marrying His New Jerusalem Church-Kingdom Bride....Look it up....in the Bible of course....

[32:46] Why do Catholics call John of Patmos “St. John the Divine*...Did I miss something??????

[43:42] “Lent” means “slow”....fitting.....

[46:38] Catholicism is like a U.S. Congress Bill...they try to hoodwink you will all of the piled on useless details....

[47:18] God (literally) said to ‘“smell” in the fear of the Lord’ (Isa 11:3)...not incense (Rev 14:6-7ff)

[47:46] LOL!!! Every time you say that you do something... “because the Jews did” It not only lowers your Spiritual Competence I.Q., it also lowers your natural one...Seriously Have you not heard of the new covenant....or is this jsut utter Satanic delusion....it’s literally anything, -including Old Covenant Judaism....instead of, and/or worse, in addition to, Christ’s New Covenant....Get a clue.....
[52:10ff] “Putting on the helmet of salvation” was a figure of speech....Are you all really that dense and moronic????..Or are you just professionally trolling Biblical Christianity!!!!...(starting with this “New Covenant Earthly Priest thing)...I argue for (sequiturly) both.....         
            Isn’t that the whole thing about Catholicism...Literally flipping Christianity on its head....hmmmmmm...Making literal and significant what is symbolic and figurative....and making light of what is crucial to the New Covenant.....I wonder who would want to make this counter-feating perversion...

[56:00] Yeahhh...no....no evidence that the Apostle ever wore these stupid “Roman” vestments...You think they’d themselves instruct people to, and how to wear them...but of course they did not....because they did not believe, practice nor teach such non-sense....

[56:45] I queasily feel like I am watching a Satanic ritualism “hocus pocus” mass...There is a dense spirit of Anti-Christ in the air...

[57:10] Yes adore the “God” you have just “created”...who tastes like bread....

[59:11] Growing up the father of a First Elder/Lay Pastor, I remember when he had to deal with any left over consecrated communion bread and grape juice....The bread was burned up in our oven....I guess the grape juice was just pour down the drain...But frankly that all seems too Catholicy for me...It is not like the bread and the grape juice had been “trans-substantiated”...Why not hand it out the homeless people??! The New Covenant is all about Practical Application vs. Ritualized conformitation... The tutoring of the Old Covenant was all about preparing the New Covenant people to now reflexively do the righteousness thing....i.e. ‘the right thing and at the right time’ (ChS 40.3)

[01:06:29] So I gather that “2000 Catholics, 1 Cup” is not, or no longer, a thing....
BTW/FYI, since (fermented) wine is actually spoiled/old grape juice, it is actually blasphemous to use that to represent the “pure blood of Christ”....

([01:08:01//01:09:10//01:09:48//01:10:21] I think this priest missed his true calling....Robin Williams’ replacement....) Cf. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E2dN315lIt8&t=9m30s
....TEASING!!!!....Actually, to, comparatively, be fair, I have just skimmed a few other RCIA series posted on Youtube, and I really lucked out that this is the one that I first started watching this one, because, this is personally the (much more than less) academic+historical type/level of presentations that I would be looking for...(Must be the often cited “German” in this priest....I myself am not or German roots, but I am likewise not the “sentimental” but factual, structured and systematic....and so I much prefer this type of “defense” of one’s faith versus the other more “inspirational” types that I have seem in the other RCIA series...
            From what I gather/understand this priest here is not a “scholarly priest” or even “scripture priest” but a regular sacramental priest..So I guess just like church leaders in the SDA Church do specialize (according to their Spiritual gift(s) as pastors, teachers/professors, evangelists, scholars/theologians, (and/or) even administrators, I guess Catholics clergy men also fall into such distinguishing/specializing categories of Church Leadership.....Notwithstanding, it always strikes me as especially odd that Catholic priests often forthcomingly admit that e.g. they are not “Scripture” Priests. I could understand them saying that they are not an Academic/Scholarly Priest as SDA pastors likewise confess that “they are not Bible Scholars/Seminarian”...but a clergy person saying, effectively, that they do not understand the Bible is really odd to me....But as I patently hear that often from/about Catholic Clergymen when they are faced with having to explain a difficult part of the Bible, e.g. the prophecies of Daniel and Revelation, or certain Systematic Doctrinal/Theological issues, then I would be willing to concede that they are just not willing to compromise themselves in trying to explain such difficult parts of the Bible without first scholarly/exegetically having studied it out....unlike with SDAs who often don’t think to dive deeper into the Bible than the current translational language it is rendered in from the underlying Hebrew and/or Greek.
            So I guess that Catholic clergymen do “specialize”...and, from what I have seen thus far, administering Catholic sacraments is quite the tedious (Biblically-unnecessary) rote laundry list, choreography and ritualism of ca. 2000 (actually 2000-40|70*) years of accumulated (spurious) Church Traditions....So I probably takes much concentration to get that heresy just right...(“or else you all won’t be forgiven...even heard”)....anyways.....

* I.e. the corrupting of the Apostolic Church leading to the skewed “already-at-work hidden (looming) reality of lawlessness implementing” (2 Thess 2:7) Catholic Church actually started around that Fall of Jerusalem in 70 to the death of John the (last living) Apostle in ca. 95-100 A.D.
[01:11:04] Do you pray together before leaving??????...Odd.....

RCIA 15: Sacraments of Healing: Reconciliation and Anointing of the Sick

[01:00] ...and the Orthodox are likewise most unbiblical for having penance/confessional practice....No such example/instruction in the Bible/NT..In fact, going to the Church for sins is the last thing that should be done (Matt 18:15-18)..and that is only for sins against another person..Personal/Private sins were to be directly dealt with between that sinner and Jesus Christ....not a priest.....

[01:34] John 20:23 is echoingly said in relation to Matt 18:15-18...and as the preceding context of the common “punchline” statement of Matt 18:18 has already shown that what will be “bound” or “loose” is one’s “sins”, then, unlike for this restating summary statement in John 20:23, there is no need to definingly repeat that there...
            So, as said above, getting forgiveness from the Church is also the third/last option and for public sins which had not been privately dealt with in the preceding two private steps....Here in John 20:23 Jesus just announces to the disciples that He now has given them the discerning gift of the Holy Spirit to do that already and fully explained Church Judgement task of Matt 18:15-18...
            And it is only through completely following this careful, stepped, process that ‘what the disciples end up deciding “will also have been binding/loosing in heaven”. And since it is sin which is the issue of fault here, then it naturally/defaultly is the applicable case that the “sin” itself is enough to condemn the person if it cannot be forgiven because the one who committed it refuses to let go of its offense towards others.
            So, COMPETENTLY READ THE BIBLE and let it define/explain/interpret itself instead of imposing your fundamentally skewed traditions and claims.....
            Again, this is patent Catholicism....a mountain of comedy of errors upon errors which they dare not ever correct or else the whole “Church of Cards” falls...And then they pridefully falsely, even lyingly, claim that: ‘this is what the Church “traditionally” always done’.... Which actually obtusely, at best, pseudo-surmisingly means: “this surely must be what the Church had “traditionally” always done, (or else we are screwed)”

[02:12] From the visionary revelation related in DA 802.1: Jesus, (still, -and forever, being purely flesh and blood Luke 24:36-43)), had actually walked in with the other disciples when they entered the room and the locked themselves in. Jesus was just made by God to be invisible to them....Just like God had done earlier in regards to other people (Luke 4:30).

[03:29] Again this is not in relation to one’s private sins...but, as it was also the case with Jesus in His Earthly Mission, Hence “how He is sending the 12 Apostles also”: it was in regards to sins done to directly them (cf. Matt 12:32 e.g. Matt 10:12-15; Luke 23:34; Acts 7:60)

[05:11] Clearly these Apostles, Paul and the rest of the NT people/writers did not have the Catholic understanding of these things as they spoke of Christians directly confessing their personal/private sins in prayers directly to Our Heavenly High Priest Jesus Christ (e.g. Heb 4:14-16).
            ...At “worst” the Apostolic Church practiced what James said in 5:16 and “confessed their “faults” (not even “sins”) to one another”...But of course, the Catholic Church needs to claim* that this is only in matters of extreme necessity. [cf. 54:20]

[05:23] Looks like CCC 1445 states that the “binding and loosing” is to be in regards to excommunion matters...That actually would be more in line with what Matt 18:15-18 is actually addressing...and not for matters of one’s personal/private sins.
[06:27] So he cited John 20:23 as the basis for Catholic Confession Penance....so let’s see if this priest ever makes mention of Matt 18:15-18 which explains what Jesus actually meant in John 20:23*...Is Matt 18:15-18 ever assigned as a reading in the Mass....Indeed I would like to do a summation of the assigned mass reading for Catholic and see if they leave any passages out...My guess is that they omit to include any passage which exposes their false teachings and tradition...of course, “in order to not confuse the sheeple”...

* P.S. Of course he didn’t....

[08:39] LOL....WRONG!!!! the Third Commandments is about IMAGE WORSHIP.....The FOURTH COMMANDMENT is about the SEVENTH DAY SABBATH....HAVE YOU NO OUNCE OF SHAME or are you that “pompously” arrogant....On this issue of ‘changing God’s Ten Commandment Law (Dan 7:25)...I would have long fled this Catholic Church Cult....
            ...Funny...but oh so Freudianly telling: I don’t see you Catholic sacrificing lambs and goats in your Church...yet I don’t see you being so concerned about amending and editing the Bible so that your sheeple do not read that in the OT....Of course not, you only blot out what you have no valid explanation for not practicing i.e. not bowing down to graven images and not keeping the Seventh Day Sabbath...

[09:44] You Catholics are systemicly using God’s name in vain...every time you claim to be Christians...Let alone “God’s True Church”...You are the Anti-Christ...just own it...

[13:16] I don’t know what is worst: You all having split the (actual) Tenth Commandment into tow to CYA for having taken out the (actual) Second Commandment...Or you all trying to dupingly tell people by this that God is so stupid that He Himself had to split that commandment into two...
            ...By the way, just by reading this corruption of the Bible...Catholics indeed do not read the Bible...They, at best, read the fancifully edit text that they claim is the Bible....LOL I always love hearing the stories of Catholics be utterly shock when they find out how the Catholic Bible has edited the Ten Commandments...

[19:00] It was revealed in Vision to EGW that all sins flow from one sin: SELFISHNESS

Another book was opened, wherein were recorded the sins of those who profess the truth. Under the general heading of selfishness came every other sin. There were also headings over every column, and underneath these, opposite each name, were recorded, in their respective columns, the lesser sins. 4T 384.3-385.1 https://m.egwwritings.org/en/book/114.1921#1925 

Under covetousness came falsehood, theft, robbery, fraud, and avarice; under ambition came pride and extravagance; jealousy stood at the head of malice, envy, and hatred; and intemperance headed a long list of fearful crimes, such as lasciviousness, adultery, indulgence of animal passions, etc.

[19:29] Yes Pride is the “root sinful disposition” of the Catholic Church...who think that they are above the Word of God and God Himself... #AntiChrist (=2 Thess 2:3-4ff)

[26:30] ‘Being slothful about 6:45 AM mass is sinful’ That is how the “man of sin” makes people think that they are sinning... By imposing on their sheeple a 6:45AM Mass instead of the private devotion (whenever it is that one awakes) that the Bible only requires

[32:00] All sin is mortal as it can lead to one being lost....No Venial vs. Mortal distinction in the NT...There were Capital Sins in the OT and these were the ones that were to be punished with capital punishment death...but the other sins also had to be dealt with as sin. Your “eroding venial” sins is what Jesus defined as the violations of the Spirit of the Law and these too were full blown sins (e.g. Matt 5:21-30ff))
[35:24] One thing I have never seen in movies depicting Catholic confession is a priest refusing to absolve the sins of the confessor...Is that ever the case...I gather not, since the Catholic Church claims it never condemns anyone to Hell....and them refusing to forgive the sins of one of their sheeple would do just that...-solely according to their skewed Theology of course....

[38:20] If you cannot repay the wrong done to someone else, then that is it...No instruction in the Bible to do any “Spiritual repayment”... Furthermore, any repayment for wrongs is actually also voluntary and only for tangible matters. (E.g. Luke 18:8)
            Paying penances to the Church is a Catholic spiritual scamming invention to make money...

[39:10] Why is it that the only penance I here being ascribed in movies is e.g. “say 300 Hail Marys and 14 Our Fathers”???not “read a passage of the Bible”...

[41:58] Yes my mom left Catholicism over that change about confession in Vatican II Council...because the Catholic Church clearly was not infallible....

[47:00] Isn’t “liking” ‘=entertaining murder mysteries’ a Catholic venial/internal sin???

[50:56] What’s the point of a “double mortal sin”. Isn’t one unconfessed/unforgiven mortal sin enough to damn one to Hell?????

[51:00] Here in a nutshell is additional demonstration how Catholic Theology is fundamentally incoherent, pointedly in regards to harmonizing with the Bible. If not confessing a (mortal) sin produces a “sacrilege” = a double mortal sin...and because it is “lying to a priest” which is like lying to God...Then why don’t these Sacrilegedly Sinning Catholic drop dead the instant they step out of the confessional....for having “lied to God”....Just like it happened to Ananias and Sapphira (Acts 5:1-11)??????
            Moreover, if Catholic Priest were “so inspired” they how come, they did not, like Peter be made aware when people are lying to them in confessionsal....(Of course they’ll say that this would only happen if/when lying to the Pope)...But I thought all Catholic Priests had a special/direct connection to God...How else can they properly do their “New Covenant priestly” duties...If God isn’t even telling them when they are being lied to..... #Bunch of Lies

[51:40] Who the Hell remembers every sin they have ever committed, even just in between confessions...and if God Himself forgives sins that you have forgotten to confess...then what is really the point of confession...Just confess all sins to God directly....And why is it a requirement to immediately, or even later confess those sins you had forgotten to confess but remembered when you stepped out the confessional’s door????? This whole thing is indeed a #Bunch of Lies

[51:50] So now, by “going across State lines to confess”, you’ve made it a “Federal Sin”....

[52:15] LOL....The Bible does not say: confess your faults to one another ...through an identity veiling screen...That also another self-serving addition by the Catholic Church...’to protect themselves’.... I thought God would protect you as you do such “New Covenant Priestly duties” More  #Bunch of Lies to cover the other #Bunches of Lies

[52:35] If it is a “grace that God gives priests to forget what people had confessed to them”, then why the need of identity veiling confessionals...You all would automatically be given that selective lobotomy “grace” right upon having “absolved” the confessor... More #Bunch of Lies for a mile high “Church of (Lying) Cards” #Repent!!!

Anointing of the Sick
RCIA 16: Sacraments of Vocation: Marriage and Holy Orders

[00:00] So...contrary to what was promised at the end of the last class, the issue of “anointing the sick” was not actually taken up at the beginning of this class....BUt that leads me to the following point in regards to Catholics and Healings:

....Jesus did not actually embrace the sickly as Popes like to demonstratively do*....He HEALED them!! (Acts 10:38)....So if the Pope is really supposed to be the direct Spiritual descendant and inheritor of the supposed first Pope Peter who was “popified” by Jesus Himself, then why can’t Pope Francis likewise do healing miracles...indeed just like Peter himself (e.g. Acts 3:6-8) , and all of the other Apostles, did????! (cf. Matt 10:1, 8) Answer that one “Apostolic Succession” Catholics!!!!!!

[09:00] Of course: “The Church was a thousand years old before it definitively took a stand in favor of celibacy in the twelfth century at the Second Lateran Council held in 1139, when a rule was approved forbidding priests to marry. In 1563, the Council of Trent reaffirmed the tradition of celibacy.”

(Thesis:) This is perfectly emblematic of Catholic Tradition....In the early days of the post-Apostolic (sectarian vs. “Universal” Church (i.e. 70-100-313/325 A.D.) Various congregations had various practices, some Biblical, some not. Then when the (now legalized) Church came together, these various traditions were shared and spread with some practicing it and other not....and then at some point later, to harmonize any such difference, the Church holds a Council to decide what should be “Universally” practiced or outlawed (e.g. the Sabbath)....So such Decided Practices/Traditions do not actually go all the way back to the Apostles...which is why you do not find them being practiced or taught by them...But it is only evolved claims which are the “canonized” by the Church.

Indeed Paul himself only advocated for celibacy as a personal choice and not a requirement.
The real reason why the Catholic Church formally required clerical celibacy in the 1100's was (indeed [09:47*])  because of all of the inheritance issues with the offspring of married priests. SO clearly not for the vocational reasons of “being free to (itinerantly) preach the gospel” cited by Paul.
            (Thesis:) Really every corrupt teaching of the Catholic Church, from abandoning Sabbath for Sunday, to Indulgences/Penances, to Purgatory etc is rooted in a matter of money (=1 Tim 6:10 =Rev 6:5-6)...not surprisingly, so is the (Fuller) Mark of the Beast:

* Again, as per the patent tell of this priest, he japes in order to dissemble the fact that there actually is no Biblical basis/reason for also this teaching/practice of the Catholic Church.

[10:03] LOL....You do not have to become celibate in order to prevent inheritance...Just incorporate the Church....E.g. Microsoft does not prevent its employees from being married so that they do not take parts of their company and give it to their families as inheritance... Many Church, e.g. the SDA Church, are structured as corporations which owns the entities and institutions of the Church...
            But perhaps the Catholic Church, which nowadays is actually effectively, if not formally incorporated, is seeing that it can save a lot of money if it does not have to give its clergy a large salary as they have no family to take care of....

[15:40] None of the mundane reasons are excuses or justifications for clerical celibacy....There is a reason why Protestant Spouse are titularly known as “Pastor’s Wife” and their children as “Preacher’s Kids” because they know that there is a level of sacrificial devotion that they have to make in support of the demanding pastoral work of the husband|wife*/father/mother*

*as actually permissible in the Bible in regards to the NT ordination of women since there is no “priestly” position/function in the NT:

[18:57] Another wrong understanding, not just by Catholics...It is only in the “resurrection” (=Millennium) Age that the redeemed will be celibate (i.e. when in Heaven and ministering in God’s Temple (Rev 7:11-17). But once life on this Earth is resumed, it will resume being like what it was intended to be from the Beginning with married couples and offspring (=Eternity Age)
            My Theological View is that God will allow the celibate Resurrection/Millennium Age for fallen human being to become whole again and that will be a time for getting to know other people...even on other planets, and then after that, the redeemed will be free to marry either their same spouse as on Earth or someone else, including from another World....
            So marriages then will be able to be based on a much better foundation as the various “short-selling”/expedient, even shallow, reasons why people get married would not be involved then...and on the flip side, when fallen humans will have, by the end of that Heavenly Millennium will have, through partaking of the leaves of the Tree of Life, regained their full perfection, including physically, and with everyone then being really equally physically perfect, then physical attraction will then not really, if at all, be an attracting reason to marry some else...And through all this, and since marriages will be Eternal then, God will allow everyone to truly marry their “soul-mate” and therefore be fully satisfied for this eternal union....

[19:41] Okayyyy...... I guess the point is, married people can have sex whenever they want to...and clearly celibate clergymen are not having sex at all...

[43:02] Thesis: The real reason why the Catholic Church recommend? not using contraception to its members is to try to avoid that under-reproducing issue that had plagued the Roman Empire...
            ..But if couples are being forced to have unwanted infants, where is the actual “love” in this (i.e. love for these potential or produced children)....Love is only possible when there is Free Will. God recommends to “be fruitful and multiply, but He does not force it, i.e. by Law, as He easily could have. E.g. after the Flood God cites several things that shouldn’t be done, but the restated mandate to “be fruitful and multiply” (Gen 9:1, 7) is actually not on a similar legal basis. (Gen 9:2-6).

[49:33] ...What happened to Jesus statement that marriage is only “annulable in cases of marital infidelity....You may have people separate/divorce for several other factors, but that cannot annul a marriage. That is why the Bible says to not be “unequally yoke” which includes marrying Spiritually immature “Christians”....So while a divorce may be required, it cannot permit either divorcee to remarry...Perhaps unless one of them does or had sexual relations and thus commits adultery and so the other one is free to remarry.

[50:32] LOL That actually is a easy case of the vows/marriage not being annulable....The wife knew that the guy was abusive and a drug user before they got married but still married him anyway....Catholics love to self-contradict themselves...

[51:38] It is only infidelity after the marriage that can “annul vows”...Though very reprehensible to have cheated before the wedding, that couple however was not married.

RCIA 17: The Spiritual Life: Prayer, Devotions, and Sacramentals

[00:43] As an inspired writer said:

“Prayer is the opening of the heart to God as to a friend. Not that it is necessary in order to make known to God what we are, but in order to enable us to receive Him. Prayer does not bring God down to us, but brings us up to Him.  {Steps to Christ 93.2} ”
[01:38] Spiritual practices, The Rosary, Benediction’...on the flip side, Catholics make prayer like rotely reciting your ABC’s to your kindergarten teacher....
            Spiritually mature Christians do not need a “compendium” book to pray...only pagans, who are afraid that if they say the wrong words then their god will zap them, do....

[10:50] ...well that’s what happens when you repeat the same prayers everyday....

[11:20] The Apostle’s Creed is not a prayer....

[12:10] The Lord’s Prayer is a template...not a script...

[20:53||21:20] LOL..How come whenever Catholic Priest recommend to their sheeple tp read a book of the Bible...it is ALWAYS one of the 4 Gospels...What about the other 62...(“69" for you all) books???? Toooo difficult for kindergarteners???? If I were born Catholic...I would leave out of utter boredom...Or just move on to more Spiritually mature Christianity.....

[22:50] “Christians”/Catholics who “levitate” during meditation are demon possessed....

[23:29] contemplatively “gazing at saints, images, the eucharist” = #Idolatry

[43:33] So the priest confesses to not having ‘forgiven his (blood) brother from his heart” (Matt 18:35)

[43:45] I never get it why people, like Catholics, who believe the dead immediately go to Heaven, even if through a period of “purging”, are ‘sad/sorry’ that people they know die...You should be sorry for yourself that you have not moved on to a better world/life like them....and since you believe in talking to/through saints, then shouldn’t you be looking forward to communicating to them????!!!! This heretical belief about the state of the dead makes no basic common sense....

RCIA 18: Christian Morality and Moral Issues

[05:00] About the “soul” which is actually nothing more complicated than the human “psyche” (=Greek psuche)...i.e. the mindful cognitive faculties of a person.....I’ll grant you that there is a “hard copy” of what makes every individual a self-cognizant and thinking person which God has a perfect and full record of in heaven...and which is what He will infuses in a new physical body at the resurrection, but there is no teaching in the 66-book Canonical Bible which says that these “psyche” (a.k.a. spirits) are conscious after one dies. Like an unplugged hard drive...They just lay there dormant, inactive and completely “disconnected” from any “hardware system” or a “network”. The psyche of the dead remain unconscious, as in a dreamless sleep, until the resurrection....

[13:47] Of course, Catholics need this hierarchal categorization of sin in order to be able to determine what type and level of penance punishment to mete out to their confessing sheeple...LOL...That’s, of course, OT thinking....

[16:44] Of course, the Bible/NT explicitly calls for tee-totaling abstinence from alcoholic/fermented drinks and not for “moderation”...Study it (see the earlier references to “Wine in the Bible”....)

[28:10] LOLOLOLOL!!! Are you that deceived (and/)or that arrogant: “God’s Eternal Law is immutable”...”It’s not going to change”....unless the Catholic Church decides to drop, truncate, reassign, stretch any part of it....Do Catholics even know the changes their Church has made to God’s Eternal Law, the Ten Commandments...or have they, by deliberately having avoid making mention of this fact, have themselves obliviously forgotten about it...Now that is really deep deception...indeed self-deception....

[28:30] Ohhh...He means “God’s Truth”....okay....w-h-a-t-e-v-e-r....Dan 7:25 alone completely sinks the entire Roman Catholic Church....

[32:22] You mean “as Catholics” and not “as Christians”....Seriously, who cares about “what Aristotle said”...oh yeah...Catholics do...because they are literally ‘corely corporately composed of various Greek philosophies’...just a prophesied ....in order to be seated in that Pagan Roman throne that Satan himself bequeathed to you power-hungry successors (=Rev 13:2)... #CarryOn (Dan 12:9-10)
            I am sure this priest will probably appeal to Acts 17:28 for his citing of Aristotle....but there, Paul was preaching to antagonistic pagans..You are speaking to prospective Catholics....

[35:00] I reliably heard somewhere that the Catholic Church supported the South’s stance/side during the American Civil War....
[36:00] “any society which says that two men can get married is doomed to fail”....Do Catholics in good standing all believe that....obviously not.
            Now I get this, of course, indeed fully agree with this view..but again, I actually do not see the greater “sacrilegious” sin as being gay marriage itself, but gay sex/lifestyle itself...In fact, gay marriage actually alleviates the potential wider societal problem as seen from the HIV/AIDS epidemic spreading of the 80's & early 90's....Focusing pointedly on gay marriage is like saying that murder is acceptable...but serial killing is abominable....

[36:36] I reliably also heard that the Catholic Church was, at least tacitly, on the side of Nazi Germany’s policies during the WWII era....
[39:55] There you go...you just torpedoed your “procreation” reason for heterosexual marriage..because homosexual people today can use fertility clinics and surrogate motherhood to merely “procreate”.... Marriage is not for the purpose of procreating...Procreation is to be free and loving choice of married people. And heterosexual, as well as wholly biological family units are the most balance and strongest bonds producing a most stable and orderly society....There will be lawsuits someday when children born in homosexual couples decide to be emancipated (at least from their non-biological parent) either for moral/psychological reasons and/or for biological reasons, and so be their own full or half authority even before adult age.

[42:46] Yuckkk.....isn’t “brown nose” a really gross allusion???

[49:40] Wow.....The issue of sin has never been so legalistic and complicated for me having grown up in the SDA environment...Again Catholic do this only in regards to their forgiveness penances shtick...SDA’s actually already understand all of these right or wrong things....but solely from working from the Ten Commandments....This Catholic ‘systemases” of legalities, not surprisingly, make things as complex as the OT laws outside of the 10 Commandments....
[50:09] uhhhh. Euthanasia is murdering... the Ten Commandments say: thou shall not murder...end of story....It is all that simple....

[56:59] Right....the “little Catholic Church” is the only entity which teaches (moral) law, duty and order... The Truth is that, by having set the widespread example that God’s Law can be altered however man self-servingly wants to and then by having established a Church which actually lets its members do whatever is right in their own eyes...(i.e. through actually no Church disciplines where their members violate all/any of those laws and yet are still considered as members)....and then can make up for it by paying money to the Church, the Catholic Church has long fulfilled its destiny as the “mystery of lawlessness” and “man of sin” entity...All that Satan needed to accomplish this was to break one link in God’s chain of Truth...and the Catholic Church wore down and broke several for him....

[57:30] Yes...since the Old Testament indeed...but haven’t you heard...in/for the New Covenant God was going to make it, through purely faith and His sin & righteousness indicating/guiding, convicting and judging Holy Spirit (John 16:8-11), that New Covenant believers would not even need a systematic legislation to know and do what is right (Jer 31:31-34|Heb 8:8-13)...So nice try uber-legalistic Catholics....Funny how it all is still just a charade...of doubly dead works
            Again, I am wagering that actual weekly Church Attendance by Catholic on their mandatory Sunday Service is less than 25% on average globally*...Which would effectively mean that the actual membership of the Catholic Church is really ca. 321 Million and not 1.285 Billion...

[57:51] ...uhhhhhh...you told that anecdote already earlier in the series.....

[58:29] ...and you remembered to remember the African-American’s name this time around....good on you...

[58:48] ohh yeah...it was about a slavery issue...so I guess he had to be named to prove that this is a true story...so no one will think you are being racist.....hmmmmm....

[59:03] Slavery is right if the slave owe money to the creditor =indentured servitude (but only for a set limited time ~bankruptcy [deprivations])...Racial slavery is wrong.

[59:22] ...soooooo....since Catholicism is steadily and precipitatively declining...it clearly is itself collapsing...clearly because it itself has lost site of truth...letting its “members” do whatever they want...Indeed Catholicism has long lost 75% of its claimed membership....

RCIA 19: Christian Morality and Moral Issues (...dealing with the Beginning of Life)

[02:58] God does not give “souls”. People begin composing their psyche as soon as they become a living being when they take their first breath...which actually (assistively) begins in the womb...
[17:20] Treating homosexual dispositions/tendencies is a mind & Spirit-ual matter and not a therapeutic one. Therapy would only be externally inculcating an alternative behavior. Renewing one’s mind as the Bible say, changes the mindset and therefore has the best/lasting results.

[38:50] Probably, in my opinion, the best, if not only good, contribution of the Catholic Church: Natural Family Planning...
            ....Although “pulling out” is also effective...and contrary to popular myth, is not actually what is condemn in Gen 38 regarding Onan....Onan sin in “pulling out” was because he had the Levirate duty to procreate with the childless widow of his brother...but he perverted this duty by only engaging in it not merely for the sex, but also not to give her offspring...So that is what is actually “the sin of Onanism” and nothing else, as popularly claimed (and as this priest himself earlier had inferred)...

[47:10] So if you say, quite seriously, that ‘a child would choose not to be born into this messed up world...and pay taxes’, then you are making the exact same case as people in favor of abortion....So of course this priest japes to try to distract from that self-contradicting statement

[01:02:25] So he’s saying that if George Tiller was killed while in the act of doing an abortion, then it would be justified, but doing so while he is in church collecting an offering as a deacon, then it is wrong...How about Paul’s counsel instead: basically “it is not your (Christian) country and if the powers that be say it is legal and you cannot murder an abortion doctor, then you have to go by it’...or get your own country ....Moreover, America is a democracy...made up of 70%-80% of professing Christians, so it predominantly is (false) Christians who are allowing abortion to be legal...
            Instead of engaging in killing people, set out to offer to adopt these otherwise aborted infant...But of course Right Wing Christians won’t sacrifice of themselves to do that...because, as seen in the comments submitted in response to my Aborting-Abortion post* everyone is actually merely selfishly looking out for their own self-interest.

[01:10:02] ahhhh come on....why go through this charade of marital sexual relation just to get a sperm sample to be submitted for that couple’s artificial insemination......Clearly, by Catholics condemning any marital sexual activity outside of penetrative intercourse, this is to maximize the chances of Catholic couple to have children. Again “onanism”, as mythically understood by people is not a thing. Plus married couple should freely want to have children and not be forced to....
            ....I’ve got an idea: Allow Catholic clergy to marry, as also not mandatorily forbidden in the Bible...and they can have children themselves...as was the case for the first ca. 1000 years of the Catholic Church...

[01:10:08] Seriously “forced” sexual intercourse is not actually an act of love, yes keep it natural, but it does not necessarily have to be merely penetrative.

[01:11:04] ....no.....it is “procreative”...it is just not solely between the two supposedly married homosexual couple...it is Biblically wrong because of the underlying homosexuality of that relationship.

[01:11:20] Uhhhhh...I don’t think a couple will have much variation in their genetic children...e.g. 6'4" vs. 5'3" children....

[01:12:45] I don’t get it...why does a condom used for the collection of sperm for artificial insemination have to be “perforated”.....isn’t that redundant and, actually, as explained, unnecessary here, if the sperm to be collected would have spilled through that perforated condom inside of the wife...I’m sure the priest meant a “Double-end condom” yet that would to be redundant. Just get the used/filled single condom, cut off the ending segment and collect the sperm there....

[01:13:40] LOL...I think IVF process is fine. Unless IVF must involve the creation of extra conceived embryos and thus the discarding of the unselected ones. I think IVF makes many samples merely out of financial efficiency, i.e. if the first implanted embryo does not work, then the process does not have to be repeated. So if this artificial/worshipful money concern is not valued, then the process can be done one fertilized egg at a time.
            Fertilization in the womb only is not a Biblical requirement. Just do all that is feasible to protect all conceived life. That is the controlling “law”...

[01:13:59] Yes, it would seem that IVF for impregnating outside of a marital bond would be  wrong....but then what was the Biblical mandate for Levirate duties all about. It involved a single parent seeking to have children through a non-marital, even natural, insemination. So can an unmarried person thus seek to have a child..Perhaps not...Thesis: Or perhaps only if that person was allowed to know the identity of the sperm/egg donor...Just as widows in Levirate insemination had to turn to the brother, next of kin, of their dead husband.

[01:16:43] Catholics have lots of hollow arguments for their life views....Just don’t murder life, don’t violate God marital and family (heterosexual) template and everything should take care of itself, including the contributions of science to aid in this regard.
            E.g. what if you found out you were pregnant and at that time you were deciding what kind of job you should take...Well if genetic screening revealed that your baby would have a condition which will require the costs of lifelong assistance, then that would help you choose for a job that pays more or have better benefits, but may have some other inconvenience that you did not want...and/or that could lead to the choice of remaining in a country which has universal healthcare (e.g. Canada) rather than taking that job offer in the U.S. which does not have such coverage.
[01:18:33] ...and genetic screening before birth can lead to making that decision of whether or not to freeze and save the baby’s umbilical cord blood for their future as it will be able to see what disease they likely will have.

RCIA 20: Christian Morality and Moral Issues (...dealing with the End of Life)

[00:00] It is manifest from the varying class attendance size that not every “catechumen” attended all of the RCIA classes...Does that prevent them from “graduating” into the Catholic Church at Easter????

[28:41] Really... ‘Canada invading the U.S. is the first/only example for a country you though of????

[32:00] uhhh...Canada won the only war with the U.S....in 1812.....

[54:30] God has only allowed for Capital Punishment for civil crimes which have taken life (Gen 9:4-6)...and He has specified what moral sins also have such a penalty...Can’t fiatly add to those....

            Not surprisingly...nothing in this whole RCIA series about any of the prophecies of the Bible...except for a (literalizing, false) claim about Mary for Rev 12...That’s not surprising indeed as God did codify Bible prophecies so that the unrighteous/Antichrist side wouldn’t be able to figure them out (Dan 12:4, 9-10), and so go on to fully fulfill them. That is why, SDA/Remnant Church baptismal seminars are mainly about Bible prophecy.


Catholicism and/in Bible Prophecy
            From what I have seen I the RCIA presentations above, the Catholic clearly touts and hinges its validity on 5 foundational aspects of its Church entity. It believes and claims that it is to function as: Prophet, Priest, King and (Christendom) Kingdom...all in representation of Jesus Christ on Earth. Well upon having recently read a very insightful observation by William Shea in a commentary of his on Daniel, I have there found a lynchpin for my overall working thesis about the prophecies of Daniel....
            First, generally speaking, I’ll concede that the counter-reformation “canards”* put out by the Jesuits about the framework of how Bible prophecies should be interpreted, namely either Preterism or Futurism...are plausible....In the sense that, and actually solely for Preterism, viewed narrowly and non-specifically, i.e. only considering some substantive and time elements of the prophecy while ignoring those which cannot be interpreted/explained, the claim that e.g. Dan 8 was fulfilled by the actions of Antiochus Epiphanes and the Maccabean Revolt can be deemed to be the fulfillment of that prophecy. But I’ll concede this only on this basis: that God indeed had a working plan to have the prophecies of the Bible be fulfilled culminating in the Zionistic establishment of the Kingdom of God with Israel sealed in the advent of the Messiah Jesus Christ, so such actions by Antiochus, could have validly fulfilled such prophecies....

* and I am pejoratively terming the “canards” pointedly with how the authoring Jesuits used (Jewish) pseudonym deception in order to try to get these views to infiltrate Protestantism....and it most successfully has indeed)

....But when this prophetic plan failed with the Jewish nation rejecting their Messiah, God had to  redraw the prophetic fulfillment board. And at that time fulfillment of these prophecies could have been possible by 70-100 A.D. But again, now the Christian/Gentile Church failed to be all that they should have been in the New Covenant, and so time was prolonged beyond 70-100 A.D. and the prophetic fulfillment plan was again reset and actually expanded and further specified with the prophecies of Revelation.
            But the unchanging constant in all of these potentially possible prophetic fulfillment endeavors/scenarios is that, at some point, Satan would have no other choice but to powerfully, i.e. supernaturally act, in order to provide a deceptively convincing opposition to the triumphant progress of God’s Kingdom Plans and Christ Gospel....And that is what the common oppositional segment scenarios in the prophecies of Daniel all provide a template of....These pointed “eschatological” adversarial prophetic segments could have been fulfilled by any (Satan-inspired) entity seeking to put an end to the progress of the people of God: whether Antiochus Epiphanes (=for 31 A.D.); an religiously meddling Pagan Roman Empire (by 70 A.D.)....but then, as time prolonged, now from within an majoritarily apostasying and enjoining Christian Church itself: from the Church in Rome (by 95-100 A.D. i.e. before the giving of Revelation), and then, as time was again prolonged, protractedly over the course of what would become “Church History” (i.e. 100-ca. 1798/1844/1908 A.D.)
            And so, when the core points of the prophecies of Daniel are seen, as cited by William Shea, it is seen that as the Catholic Church gradually came to find itself fulfilling the Judas-like “son of perdition” betrayal role to Christ’s True Faith, it unwittingly came to usurp all of the attributes of Christ that the prophecies of Daniel were trying to point out....The Catholic Church literally “took the place” that Christ was being shown to occupy in those prophecies of Daniel...and so it indeed became the “Anti”-Christ entity! Namely:
Daniel 2 presents Jesus Christ and the cornerstone of a glorious Kingdom. The Catholic Church pompously believes itself to be that Stone Kingdom to the point of dismissing any need for Christ to ever return Gloriously in a Second Coming...despite what the New Testament copiously clearly states.
Daniel 7 presents Jesus Christ as the (judging) King who comes to ascertain the population of His Kingdom. The Catholic Church presents itself as the deciders of this worthiness

Daniel 8 presents Jesus Christ as Priest with His Heavenly Ministry sanctifying His People. The Catholic Church have fabricated a New Covenant Earthly Priesthood to do such ministering on Earth in their Church services.
Daniel 9 is the prophetic cornerstorne of the Bible by its focus of the First advent and work of Jesus the Messiah. It seals how, especially timed Bible prophecies, should be interpreted and reckoned. The Catholic Preterist and Futurist takes on this prophecy have sufficiently undermined and skewed the proper calculation of prophetic “time”.
            William Shea himself says that Daniel 9 presents Christ as “Sacrifice”, and that is also the case, and it can be seen that in their believed to be actual sacrificing of Jesus Christ in their Mass, Catholicism has also usurped this aspect of Jesus Christ, namely in what was supposed to be His “once and for all” sacrifice....Moses was severely punished by God for effectively saying that Jesus, who was represented by “that Rock” in the Wilderness, should be struck again and repeatedly (Num 20:9-11). Likewise the Catholic Church’s repeated striking of Christ is capitally blasphemous to God.

            So where God tried to present His Messiah as Prophet, Priest and King/Kingdom in these major prophecies in Daniel, the Catholic Church has sought to divert that focus away from Christ and/or even unto itself instead....And that is indeed what Satan would need to have his Anti-Christ power do, and the Catholic Church has more than amply complied....ironically, but expectedly enough, thus fulfilling the actual True interpretation of those very prophecies.
            So while all of the above doctrinal, theological and historical RCIA claims refutations are enough, to me, to show that the Catholic Church is not Christ Church on Earth, the added element of the RCC having also fulfilled the Bible’s prophecies of the entity which was to oppose the true cause and people of God, thus being the Anti-Christ power, is indeed what unmovably seals my rejection of Catholicism. That is indeed the purpose of prophecy, which is God’s prophetic voice. It is given by God to guide and confirm His Faithful Righteous People in the path of Truth.
By the way, Preterists/Catholics, what is the point of a “prophecy” if it only restates in symbolic terms ‘what had already occurred in history’???? Prophecy from God (accurately) tell of what is to come,* not what has already taken place.     ...btw: the New Covenant “Babylon = Jerusalem” is the capital city of the Holy Roman Empire = Vatican City = The Roman Catholic Church 

            So that all summarily/contextualizingly said above about the Catholic Preteristic and/or Futuristic take of Bible Prophecy, I would say that the interpreting views presented by (manifestly “lay apostolate”* Catholic preacher/expositor) Karlo Broussard in this prophecy seminar** are, generally speaking, at best: ‘what might have been’ the, then additionally, fully pursued and applicable fulfillment of these prophecies...if the establishment of the Kingdom of God had been successfully, fully established in the First Advent of Jesus Christ (cf. Mark 1:14-15). But OT Israel, and then the First Century (Gentile) Christian Church, both failed to see these possible things through and so time was prolonged, now into a resetting (Historical) Church Age (i.e. 95-1798/1844+ A.D.) and now all of these prophecies and their fulfillments were to be reapplied to the entity/entities which would now be naturally playing those typical prophetic roles. E.g. “Babylon” was seamlessly transferred from being Pagan Rome (cf. 1 Pet 5:13) to its natural and ideological successor Papal Rome and it also/likewise persecuted the (actually) faithful people of God.

            So there is no need to refute each of the interpretation claims made in that Catholic Prophecy seminar point-by-point. My recommendation....Do go through his entire seminar, like I gradually will (while I am working on my blog posts on Daniel 7 & 8), and compare Karl’s patent: “it seems” claims for a preteristic interpretation (which someone in his audience once argued against with him for a futurist one instead...so Catholics are themselves not sure what to believe)....and read my prophecy-exposition blog posts* and/or view a (SDA) Bible/Doctrines/Prophecy seminar, which uses the same Historicist method of interpretation that the Reformers, and Protestant did (prior to them being duped by the Jesuit Counter-Reformation “canards”*** deceptively passed off as the writings of Jewish Expositors through the use of (Jewish) Pseudonyms, and see for yourselves which one actually has concrete and cogent Biblical Authority and Meaning, as well as most objectively/documentedly accurate fulfillment, including in regards to chronological time. 

** e.g. the Discover Prophecy Seminar by David Asscherick: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL0B15C8196475FB58

*** see the history of this in my own college research paper# as well as the links in this section##


1. [1] As I related in my personal testimony (see the “My 1000th Word” section) when the SDA Church started way back in the early 1990's using computerized visual aids for their prophecy series, it literally revolutionized their Evangelism, and that is a key reason why they are, -behind a Biblically sound message of course, the fastest growing Christian Denomination in the U.S., and probably also worldwide, currently baptizing over 3700 people per day (see Note #1 in here) and doubling in membership ca. every decade.

No comments:

Post a Comment

This blog aims to be factual and, at the very least, implicitly documented. Therefore if applicable, any comment which contains unsubstantiated/unsupportable ideas will not be allowed to be published on this blog. Therefore make the effort to be Biblical, truthful and factual.

-It typically takes 1-2 days for an accepted submitted comment to be posted and/or responded to.

[If you leave an "anonymous" comment and, if applicable, would like to know why it may not have been published, resend the comment via email (see profile) to receive the response.]