Did the Roman Catholic Church Give us the Bible?

Yeah, I've had it. I'm sorry. I've had it. What what what have you had it with you?

Why because I think you're off the wall, you know, you're citing all these things and claiming them to be facts that are not

Facts. No, well actually here's the difference you you made a whole bunch of claims that you just made claims over and over I told you where you could go.

You can go to the CDC You can go to you can go to dr Fauci and go back and listen and see the things that we said

But it's off the wall cuz it's not part of your narrative So like are you looking for truth or narrative becomes the thing and and you're you

You're now upset just because we said something that didn't support the narrative No, that's not it at all

Then what is? I'm done To answer your questions your host from striving for eternity ministries

Rappaport We are live apologetics live here to answer your most challenging questions that you have about God and the

Bible We are here to answer any question that you have about God in the Bible and we can do that here if you doubt that Just go to apologetics live comm

Scroll down till you see where to participate. It's the little duck icon the stream yard icon

You can click that join us. Ask me your most challenging question. Just remember one thing.

I don't know is a perfectly good answer tonight our topic will be

Did the Roman Catholic Church give us the Bible? Maybe some of you remember some weeks back

We had someone toward the end of our show come in. His name was Sebastian we he was making a case for Mary being the

Ark of the Covenant we got into a Kind of a lengthy discussion. We went over time and got into a lengthy discussion of the canon of Scripture and how we got it

Sebastian agreed to come back so that we could give him more time and have a lengthier discussion.

So he will be joining shortly and I Should introduce myself in the show.

That would be good. My name is Andrew report. I am the host of apologetics live It's a ministry of striving for eternity

If you want to find out more about us go to striving for eternity org

That is striving for eternity org. I do encourage folks to do two things one

I encourage you to watch this live because we have a well We have a very active chat group on YouTube that watch us live

I know there's people that chat on Facebook as well But we don't get to see that during the show just the way

Facebook works But a lot of people are active in the chat And so if you want to go to the

YouTube channel for striving for eternity If you go to apologetics live comm that also has a link for you to watch the show from YouTube You can just click from there to the

YouTube link to get to YouTube. And so Encourage you to do that if you want to chat.

Also, I want to encourage you guys to share this out To others, especially if you find some value in it

I Have been amiss in reading reviews Well, because I forgot that we to had a service that would check all the reviews and I Didn't I had some not signed up for apologetics live.

So I wasn't getting the reviews. So We got some recent reviews and then I went back and saw some old ones that I figured hey, that'd be fun to to read

So the most recent one that I have not read on the show is a five -star review from Someone named leatherneck 7476 say brilliant brilliantly done good

God has gifted this group I'm not sure which episode that was with but that was on September 2nd

So would have been one the the one that goes back a ways. I forgot about this. This was from the end of May And I find it

I always find this interesting because I was able to determine that I think it's the same person leaving the same review a one -star review and then they go in with a different a different Name to do but one is a one -star review unloving sickening behavior towards others

And he says I pray Andrew and his co -host repent of the way they treat others who disagree with them

Especially the brethren this podcast and others like it are causing division in Christ Church I really found that interesting because this is the guy if you go back six months or so this was a guy that believed

Disagreed with what John MacArthur said about the difference between the mind and the brain with mental health and this guy was totally misrepresenting what

John MacArthur had said and we got into a whole discussion of different What is a disease things like this?

And we actually if you remember that one, this is the one where we had actually read

Aaron Brewster read from the DMS 5 manual that defines what a disease is on ADHD and ADD and if you remember the guy that came in argued that the

DMS 5 the the actual manual on defining what diseases are is Not an expert witness

He was the expert witness with no degree No, no background in science and didn't like that we pointed that out that was a and it is kind of funny he

He had posted that it is interesting because one of the things that's very interesting

I find with this show is the fact that when you look at the reviews We have the the overwhelming number of them

Talk about the fact that we are very polite to guests. In fact as we'll have tonight

I'll do my same, you know Disclaimer that I've put before especially

I did it just last week when we had Layton flowers on I'll give you an update with that in a moment as well But we allow folks like Layton and Sebastian to have time to talk

So the fact that I don't answer everything that I may disagree with with a guest

Does not mean that there was no argument that could be made As as my show here the purpose is to do apologetics to teach apologetics, that's what we do here and so Being that it's my show

If there's a guest like Layton flowers or Sebastian or anyone else. We just played a clip from Godless grandma who is on here at the beginning of the show and I could do an entire show as we did with godless grandma

Responding to Some of the things she said I could do that with Layton and I could do that with Sebastian here who's in today

Because it's my show so If I let someone talk it's because I want to respect the guest.

So I say that because well There's a lot of people that just get upset when I let guests actually speak and they feel like well

You got to cut them off and address everything that they say wrong Well, I'm not always looking to do that there's things

Layton said that I realized afterwards when I was really listening Yeah, I could have I could have responded to that. I couldn't respond it to that Well, I will be responding to that maybe because Layton will have me on his program

We were trying to set up a date. He's traveling right now So I will go on his soteriology 101 and I will as he is teaching soteriology 101

I will go on there and teach soteriology Well 201 301 401 and 501 if you've never been to college and you don't get the one -on -ones basically one -on -ones are entry -level classes and then your sophomore classes are 201 they started, you know 200s and then

You know junior your third year is 301s fourth year 401s advanced is 501

So that's kind of the way that so when he says he's teaching soteriology 101 will teach him more advanced

Soteriology the doctrine of salvation so And and I don't know

I'll let the audience I just knocked this I just knocked the mics on that fix this I I'll let the ask the folks in the audience.

I don't know for those of you I know some of you do watch Layton. I I don't typically follow him

But if I'm curious anyone out there if he did a response video to our apologetics live because Layton usually does that He'll do response videos that are quite long.

So I'm just gonna I'm just gonna say that we were supposed to be joined by Ed Romine.

He was in last week Ed Is is said he was gonna come because he

Didn't have things at church and then all of a sudden at let's see He usually and by the way, Ed usually calls me just before we go live just to say hi

And he calls me during the show to see if I will put him on see you know to just add him in somehow or just to see if I'll answer the phone and Doesn't matter because my phone shuts off during the show, but Ed said

I won't be I won't be able to make it I have an evangelism opportunity come up for tonight.

So he won't be here I told him he broke my heart, but you can you could pray for his evangelism opportunity

Drew is not here And therefore I it makes it harder for me to follow all of the the comments as they go rapid -fire

So those that are watching live I will ask you in the chat if you have a specific question for either myself or Sebastian Just put in all caps question

Colon and then ask your question That will make it at least a little bit easier for me to see that you you have a question that you want asked on the show

And I had a board member that told me I don't mention this enough So I should say if you want to guarantee a question gets asked if you're on YouTube We can do you can do super chats

That highlights it and keeps it frozen up top for me so that I definitely see that question and we read those it's a way of both supporting the ministry and making sure that We get to your question

Give a shout out to my good friend at dead man walking podcast He says my man, what's up,

Andrew great subject tonight dead man walking is Greg Moore a great podcast if you're not listening to that one, may

I encourage you to go to your podcast app and Follow that one.

He's also on YouTube. So good brother great stuff. I Do like a lot of what he has actually

I'm probably gonna reach out to one of his recent guests to have him come on my rap report podcast and Talk about being debanked because Christians get well conservatives get debanked.

So I'm trying to figure out. Mr. Tracy said is

Andrew under the weather not that I know of Not sure why you think

I'm under the weather So Just Jesse said good show with Leighton.

I was extremely distracted in the comments though. See that's the thing Jesse that's why we have the

Podcast so you can always go back and listen as well Because I'm just telling you folks if you're not in the chat, you're missing out

Let me bring Sebastian in and as I do that folks I want to remind you to please share this on your different social media so that others can join and watch live

So Sebastian, how are you this evening? Okay, I'm well, how are you? Good good good.

So before we started the show you and I started talking about something completely unrelated to Roman Catholicism and the

And the topic tonight and so I figured hey, let's if it'd be okay

Let's talk about the dangers of a keto diet Because that's related to Roman Catholicism or not

But but it is something that you you and I were talking there's some and I said, hey, it would be good

For folks who a regular here at Apologetics live We used to have one of our older co -hosts who is very into the keto diet

I've always been in favor of a modified keto diet But I'm not a big fan of a full keto diet because it does damage to the liver and different things

So and you actually had been trying to keep very strict to a keto diet and it affected you

Yeah, I was on the keto diet for probably around three years in my very very early 20s and I went to the very extreme of cutting nearly all carbohydrates up completely for a very long time and and Yeah, what damage did that do to your body?

Okay, so the basically the lack of soluble fiber one caused the toxins that I was consuming from all the animal products to accumulate in my liver and soluble fiber is needed to Latch on to fat soluble toxins there in the bile and the liver produces bile and it's basically the liver's poop in a way and so When you consume soluble fiber, not only does it stimulate the liver to produce bile and to dump it into your gut but now this soluble fiber will latch on to the

Bile which is where all the toxins are and it'll carry it out through the through the entire digestive tract until you excrete it

However, when I was in the keto diet, I wasn't really eating a whole lot of Soluble fiber.

I was really just eating the fats and the meats and So nowadays you see everyone on the keto or on the carnivore diet

They're not eating enough soluble fiber And and that's one problem. So they're gonna start getting liver problems

All the vitamin A vitamin A is a fat soluble vitamin you do need but you do need it vitamin

A However, it will accumulate in your liver. And this is this isn't anything that That's new.

I'm not saying anything new. This is well established fat soluble vitamins accumulate in the liver, especially vitamin

A and So people who are on the carnivore diet and you see people doing crazy things like eating liver and organ meats all the time

Which isn't bad, but they're eating it all the time. They're making it a staple in their diet and then they're eating a bunch of fats and without the soluble fiber to feed the gut bacteria the fats are going into their stomach and they're basically just Fat has a sort of antimicrobial

Properties so continue to eat it without supporting your gut might with without supporting your buying your gut biome.

It'll essentially just Act as an antibiotic in your gut and that's pretty much what happened in my gut

On Top of that the lack of Carbohydrates your brain needs carbohydrates

And so when you're not supplying your brain with with glucose from the diet, it's gonna start catabolizing its own body tissue to produce

Carbohydrates which are necessary to feed your brain And this is this requires something called adrenaline.

So people at the end of a carnivore keto diet They might experience or have problems with their adrenaline they may have adrenal fatigue or some sort of dysregulation where a

Small event will cause their adrenals to basically go hyperactive and that was one thing that happened to me during the end was tiny events

What's overstimulate overstimulate my adrenal glands? and so I remember sitting in a movie theater with a girl that I was dating at the time and The music in the movie theater is very loud.

It's very rumbling And it kind of hits you in your chest and it's very stimulating I remember being on the border of a panic attack in the movie theater because My heart was just beating out of my chest.

It was my adrenals. I was thinking to myself. What is going on here? in retrospect,

I know now that My dietary practices of restricting carbohydrates so much on top of the other

On top of my lifestyle is I was very active as well as though not only was

I restricting Carbs for my diet, but I was actively depleting carbs through exercise basically, all this together was was leading to an adrenaline crisis and so my advice to people who are following the keto and carnivore diet is to be cautious and to maybe

Reintroduce carbs Periodically or cyclically

And most importantly to consume soluble fiber whether that be in the form of beans or vegetables

Or maybe even something like a psyllium husk fiber supplement you need the constant stream of soluble fiber to clean out your liver and and to support a

Healthy liver function and and all these hormones like adrenaline they get stored in the liver people don't realize that And and it's it's hugely important like excess adrenaline won't actually lead your body until it's been

Completely excreted via the soluble fiber. And so if you're on the keto or carnivore diet and you're not consuming soluble fiber

You're just gonna become a toxic wasteland for for everything all the toxins that you consume from your diet

Yeah, that's the thing. I mean someone in the chat put up there. It's like the old Atkins diet

Yeah, there's all these different fads with the diets and and they will often work at the beginning

But a lot of them get imbalanced and that's that's the thing It's it's there's a lot of different ways to be healthy,

I mean look I'm I go extremes, right? I I go from a sauna to a to a cold plunge

I cold plunge almost every morning if I'm not if I don't do a cold plunge. I'm in a cold. I take a cold shower People think that's extreme.

But hey So, uh, I guess peel the thing I'm sick dead man walking said that my voice sounds a little scratchy that It's going around.

Well, I don't I feel okay. Don't don't hear it in my own voice Another podcaster

Parker Brown says I shared he's me referring to sharing this this episode Or this live stream.

He said appreciate your friendship, brother I love what you do Parker Brown is from the watch

Podcast another pocket if you like movies that would be a podcast to go and check out is the watch well podcast

Parker Brown's a good brother. So Let's get into our discussion Sebastian For folks

Give give folks a little bit of your background You're you're you're terrified if I take the banner off here

The the banner that you've the sub the heading you've given yourself is traditional Roman Catholic So explain what you mean by that and a little bit about yourself

So I am a traditional Roman Catholic. That means that one. I'm a Catholic this means that I accept that there has been a tradition of 2 ,000 years of practiced

Christianity that has been organized and unified and That has endured to this day and I am

Roman Catholic, which means that I accept the the papacy it means that I acknowledge

Rome to be the Center of authority within the church and this is something that's been recognized since the very beginning.

That's Something else I suppose we could talk about and then I'm traditional because I I have to add traditional because nowadays people call themselves

Catholic, but they accept the that the changes that are

Being made by the people who occupy the Vatican. And so I suppose I could also mention that I'm a state of the cantus which

It comes from the Latin word sate vacante, which means sate means seat vacante means vacant Means I see the the chair of Peters being vacant and that's because the person who's occupying it who calls himself a

Pope isn't actually the Pope, but he's an anti Pope and so that's why

I have to say that I'm traditional which means that I accept the dogmas that state that heretic cannot be a

Pope and Francis and all the other Vatican to Claimants are all heretics and thus anti popes.

So I'm a traditional Roman Catholic Okay, so you you reject?

Vatican to that's right. Okay, and and I assume that and so what

I want to do is I want to get your reaction This is I want to play a clip.

This is from Ben Shapiro and The gentleman he has on I forgot his name now

Is You already know who it is, so I want to play this clip and get your reaction the sort of countervailing effect of that is that you've seen this and this this occurs in the

Jewish community as well as in the Catholic and the Protestant community as well Is that in a sort of rebelling in against sort of watercolor version of the religion?

You do see people, you know embracing a version that is, you know It's so sort of reactionary to that and move beyond the boundaries in the other direction

So in terms of Catholicism, you do see a wing of Catholicism now that is attempting to for example wholesale reject

Vatican to right? For example, well, what do you make of that? No, and that's the problem So as I've been a longtime critic of Catholic progressivism

I'm also a critic of what we call kind of the more radical traditionalism within Catholicism and that's one of the marks

You're quite right. I would say a disdain for the Pope and you see that in some Catholic circles.

I mean almost a Disrespect toward the Pope but but even more importantly is the rejection of an ecumenical council

You can't do that and be a Catholic. It's as simple as that I mean that to us is the highest doctrinal authority there is as a council if you say well,

I don't like Vatican to Well, then how about Vatican one? How about Trent? How about Nicaea?

How about Chalcedon? Can I take and choose which councils I like I've told some of the radical traditionalist

Catholics You become really a Protestant at that point. You've given up on the authority of the church. So that's the problem

Yeah, you can move this thing in that direction See my one of my great heroes, of course John Paul the second everything we've been talking about He he understood and believed and propagated and he was a great student of philosophy

I loved st. Thomas Aquinas and the and the sciences and cultural engagement. He didn't want to sort of ghettoized

Catholicism or you know crouching defensively behind walls He didn't want that. He wanted a boldly confident

Catholicism that goes out to meet the world Based on Logos is that's what Rossinger again saw is if we're the religion of Logos That means we can meet any scientists.

We can meet any philosopher. We can meet any representative of the culture So it's not a defensive fearful

You know ghettoized Catholicism that to me would be the the rad trad side of it at its worst

So I don't want that. I don't want Catholic progressivism I want what we've been talking about that's the trajectory that I want to stay on.

Okay, so I'd be curious, you know, you're He's saying that your view the view that you hold to is

Is something that would be you know, as he said you can't be Catholic and reject

Vatican to I mean he even said that you'd be a Protestant which was funny because before Before it got to that point

This is Tom Tom Shepard from even even if more he said so he was referring to you when you were describing that you reject

The the Pope he said so a modern -day Martin Luther so even

Tom Shepard is Indirectly may be agreeing that you sound Protestant Yeah, well, that's rich coming from Bishop Barron because he pretty much

Applauded the selection of pro -lgbtq Wilton Gregory to archdiocese of Washington DC So he says he doesn't want to become like a progressive but he's clearly someone who endorses

LGBTQ and if you're even if you're someone who identifies as a Christian and you're a

Protestant and I don't regard you as a Christian Even I can see that or even even you rather could see that this is

This is an abomination he's he's endorsing at the LGBTQ community the second thing

I'll mention is that it's rich that he accuses us of Being like Protestants when we're actually the ones who are upholding traditional

Catholic dogma and he's the one who rejects it And so it's it's actually not a coincidence that he's talking to Ben Shapiro of all people who's a

Jew Because this sort of interfaith dialogue is something that only start to occur after Vatican to actually, there's an interview with a

Yemeni spy who used to work with the Jewish group and their main mission was to introduce this is in the 1980s was to promote interfaith dialogue with the

Jewish community and there was never interfaith dialogue There was only debate and conversion. There was no there was never this sort of ecumenism or this false ecumenism where all religions are true and Bishop Baron has even has even said at one point that how it might be empty is

How empty do does any Christian does anyone who identifies the Christian actually believe that hell is empty and that's obviously a whore

That's a horrible way. That's that's completely false and unbiblical the Bible clearly shows that there are many people who go to hell and that the

Path to holiness is narrow and the path to destruction is broad. So he's a heretic

He's not a Catholic and he's not someone who should be taken seriously the fact that he appeared on Ben Shapiro show.

I mean, what is the daily wire? It's basically just a propaganda outlet at its best. It's basically pro -israel

Propaganda that's just found its way that's wedged its way into American society. And now they're saying

Not now they're trying to ally with the Christian community by saying. Oh look There we're all for Judeo -christian values right as if Jews don't completely reject

Christ So it's just a complete He's a heretic and he's just an evil person so he's not a

Catholic by any stretch He probably doesn't know anything about what the church actually teaches So he's a bishop and he doesn't know what the church teaches so Do you do you have any?

He's lost all the jurisdiction By being a heretic a heretic can't have any jurisdiction. He's he's basically an imposter

But he says you're the heretic by and and I mean, he's he's at least keeping with the the teachings of the church

No, he's not. So you don't believe that the councils are authoritative I do but he's the one who doesn't bet

That's the sleight of hand that's being at play here Is that I'm the one who upholds the traditional dogmas of the faiths you you know

Trent to right? Yeah, everything up until the Vatican too, but here I'll tell you so it's so But you don't accept

Vatican to know because it preaches What what so, okay, what specific heresy did that because that's a that's a council so if the councils, you know,

I'm asking this because It's not it's a false council as someone who's not

Catholic right I my understanding of Catholicism is from reading Catholic history and documents and you know the councils so And this is this is gonna be a core part of our discussion

I think later when we talk about the Bible What then defines? So let's start specifically with Vatican to you're saying it's heresy

What made that? Council heresy. Okay, so I'll give you an example There's a portion in Vatican to call the lumen gentium

This is basically considered the dogmatic Constitution on the church and in Vatican to this is

Vatican to's Constitution on the church and in lumen gentium 16

We have this quote But the plan of salvation also embraces those who acknowledge the

Creator and among these the Muslims are first They profess to hold the faith of Abraham and along with us

They worship the one merciful God who will judge humanity on the last day The Muslims worship

Jesus Christ and the Most Holy Trinity No, they don't so how can you say that Muslims worship the one true merciful

God along with Christians? And this is in Vatican to which is supposed to be a council and they're saying that Muslims worship

God the Christian God So that's that's horrible All right,

I mean Catholicism has some different right so I was actually I have someone coming by the house tomorrow night because he's you know, he tends

Roman Catholic Church, and he asked me about praying to the Saints and Whether that's biblical he did some research and he wants to review it with me.

And so yeah, I find interesting because like Yeah, I look I think about Mary, right?

People, you know Roman Catholics will pray to Mary. Do you do you pray to Mary at all?

Yes Okay. Why why do you do that? well, because the Bible instructs us to Okay, she's was she like a mediator

God dispenses grace through Mary and it's through Mary that Grace is also given to us who pray to pray to her for intercession

So I guess what I'm asking is this so does she act as a mediator? Between us and God God God gives her grace and she then gives that grace to us

So when we pray to Mary she gives us grace that was given to her by God, okay

I'll try a third time. So is she a mediator between God and man? I just told you that God gives

Mary grace and she gives us grace So whatever whatever make make with that what you will

I'm not gonna play semantics here, but no, I'm not playing it's it's yes or no So I'm now

I'll ask is that your definition of a mediator because I'm asking is she a mediator and you're answering something else.

So I'm trying to make sure I understand that your your answer is not yes or no

Either she is or is not right and so your answer is something else So I'm trying to say is that are you saying she's a mediator by your definition or not?

Is that your definition of a mediator or are you saying she's familiar really with with what that term encompasses?

I would suppose yes, because she would be mediator would mean middle and she is between us and And God so sure

Yeah, I mean cuz cuz that would be a thing and and yet, you know in Scripture It says there is only one mediator between God and man and that's the man

Christ Jesus Right, so so like I look at that and say, okay, so I'll go further back and say that would you say?

Okay Vatican twos a problem I'll go further back and say no. No, your whole Catholic Church is heretical long before Vatican, too and you could just look at when you started work worshipping and or having

Mary as a mediator because Paul writes that there's only gonna be one Right Well Here's where I want to get to the question because this becomes

Essential it's it's and and someone put it. Hold on. Let me find I Saw someone put yeah,

Jesse. He said what's the standard and that's what I wanted to get to with with the question Okay, let me let me ask you this

Andrew. Do you pray for other people? Do I pray for other people? Yes, I pray to to Jesus to for other people.

Okay, so what's the difference? You're a mediator now. No. Yes, you are. You just said that you prayed other people on their behalf

So you're asking God to give to give that person grace. I'm asking

God I'm asking God to who's who's the mediator Jesus between God and men.

I'm talking to Jesus Who's the mediator Jesus? Okay, who do you think

Mary is talking to? She's talking to God Eating with us The difference is you're going to marry to go to Jesus.

Yes And when someone asks you to pray for them, that's what you're doing. It's the same thing.

So So you're saying that that Mary can bestow grace

I'm not bestowing grace when someone asks to pray for me Then what are you doing that's the whole point of prayer is for you to ask

God to give that person grace No, I'm going to God and just raising the the the petition to God Right so that he can give that person grace

Do you see the difference I'm not going the grace there's no difference Am I bestow you're praying for someone else so on their behalf and when

I asked for Mary to pray for me to God That's that's what's happening. It's the same thing.

She is more favored than me than me and other people She's the most holy creature on earth. She was born without She disagrees with that.

She disagrees with that, but she doesn't yes, she does But but the issue that I'm raising with it is this is

I'm not just okay. Let me ask this Do I bestow grace on people that asked me to pray for them

Can I if you are a holy person? This is this is well, I mean look at People who even touched

Paul or Peters What was it people

Peter performed the first miracle after the Ascension. He I think he even raised someone from the dead

At one point and this isn't even just him by the way, there are other saints who perform miracles So yes, you can as a holy person

Perform miracles and that that requires God's grace So yes See you keep playing word games again

God's grace is not the same as me being able to give grace the way you're saying Mary does It is the same thing because it's not your grace.

It's God's grace So when you are giving someone else God's grace you are acting as a channel as a mediator

So you're wrong on that So I this is gonna get back to what

I'm saying about the standard you're you're just making Definitive statements that this other

Catholic bishop is a heretic and he's wrong. I'm wrong by what authority

Can you claim those such things? I mean I can I can base what I'm saying off of the

Bible and off of what? Previous Christians have believed for the past 2 ,000 years. So there's there's not only evidence from the

Bible itself Which is the Word of God, but there's evidence from the tradition of Christianity Which is also the

Word of God from the past 2 ,000 years And so you can only draw on the Bible, but when there's other

Christians from the past 2 ,000 years who contradict what you say then there's the problem is that You're interpret.

You're obviously interpreting the Bible incorrectly because you're going against what Christians have always believed. So Yeah, so that's my authority it's tradition and scripture yeah, so so your authority is your tradition in your scripture and and yet your tradition

Had to be edited because if you read the early church fathers if you know anything about the early church fathers, you know, there's two versions of the early church fathers the original and the

Roman Catholic version Do you know that there's two there's two different versions know the

Rome Rome was always seen as the authority on matters pertaining to faith and morals

Question again because I'm I kind of know where we're going with this but I Asked you a question a very simple direct question.

Yes or no questions and you do a red herring and answer something else So I'll ask it again. Do you know?

That there are two versions of the early church fathers Okay So the answer that is you don't know

No, I'm just rejecting your promise. You're trying to your that your framing of the question is dishonest

Did you know that you're uh, did you know that you're a wife beater Andrew? Did you know that you'd be your wife?

Oh, no, I know that I'm not And you know how Because you know that you're a homosexual don't you see

That's that's the brain. That's the type of question. You're asking. It's dishonest. It isn't and because you

So stop asking the question to just state present present your thesis so and then back it up with evidence, that's it

A question that's Okay, the conversation is not gonna go well if you just keep claiming everything's dishonest just because you don't like it

Are you a homeless? Did you know that you're a homosexual Andrew? Did you know that you're a wife beater? Just say just say you are this

Ask me a question Sebastian Can we verify whether I'm a homosexual or whether I'm a white be wife beater?

Is that something we can verify? Yes Yes, can we verify if there are two versions of the early church fathers yes or no

Yes, of course, and I'm saying that there were not there were not two churches early church fathers

And you're saying that there are so just provide the evidence Like what's so the evidence is if you go and you get the early church fathers that you look up the books

Okay, the the set of books there are two different versions of them

There's the Roman Catholic version and what's called the Protestant version The Protestant version is the original then you have the

Catholic one that was edited because it came out later Okay. So yes, there are two versions.

It's not dishonest question Calling it dishonest when it when there's a way to verify it is actually dishonest on your on your own part

Sebastian No, because you're calling me. You're calling me dishonest for rejecting your your your claim that there were

Two sets of early church fathers. I disagree with that and that doesn't make me dishonest Just means that I don't agree if you want to have an honest dialogue please

You need to stop projecting your behavior on me. Okay, I said did not say you were

Dishonest here we go You don't even demonstrated how your framing was dishonest, no, you didn't yes,

I did I asked you You know that you are this did you know that you were that that's what you just said Did you know that you okay? You said you asked me?

Did you know that there were two early church fathers? I said no there weren't and then you started accusing me of being dishonest

Presents your evidence for me. I did we can go we can go look up on Amazon.

I'm sure And find the different versions, but the the issue I'm asking is now is when you say

I'm being dishonest I'm maybe you don't have the maybe you have a different definition of you know what and a what honesty means so when

I'm saying that I'm asking an honest question it is it is because of the simple fact that What we can look at is

We can look at a Question that can be tested

So provide the evidence stop beating around the bush Okay so if we were to go to the the books of the early church fathers

Can you go out to him if you go out to Amazon you will be able to find I'm sure That there's two of them

Is that now is that something we can test yes or no? Yeah Yeah, so provide the evidence like what are you waiting for?

Well, okay fine. You're gonna you're just gonna keep with this. So I will go and look up the the

Documents on Amazon because you're you're totally not wanting to deal with the actual question

I'm literally asking you for the evidence and you are withholding it from me. So I'm withholding it

Okay, I'm withholding it yes, tell me you said you made the claim and I'm waiting for the evidence

Okay, I made the claim that there were two you referred to it as Dishonest.

No, I referred to your framing of the question. You said did you know and I said

Hold on how is asking you if you know something to be dishonest how

I started shaking my head when I started shaking me at my head and saying no you are you all of a sudden

Started freaking out When I when I was saying no there weren't there weren't two sets of early church fathers and all of a sudden you started freaking

Out no, I was freaking out. So I'm dishonest and I was freaking out. Yeah, you're framing your framing was

Listen Sebastian, you got us. You got to stop this nonsense The question was not dishonest to ask you if you know something it is not dishonest

You keep saying it was dishonest because of why is it because you didn't know and you feel embarrassed

Is it because you do know and you're you you feel caught? Is it that you you just don't want to have to answer the question?

What is it? I've already I've already told you that I disagree Illustration you gave a nice story told you that I disagree with your claim that there were two early church fathers

Nothing That has nothing to do with the question you said the question was dishonest

How you were you were engaging in dishonest behavior? So how Because if you can't answer that then you're being dishonest so Argument it's what you're saying present the evidence you you made a claim

There's no there's nothing in me asking you if you know something that is a lie

You had a simple way you could say yes or no you answered it It's not a dishonest question

So you now have to show me Ask me and are there were there two church fathers and I would say no

There were not two sets of early church fathers And now since you're the one who says that there are that there were

It Provide the evidence. So what are you waiting for? We've been asking for the evidence for the past ten minutes okay, the issue is is

I've and I've asked this. How is my question? You said it's dishonest.

How is asking that question dishonest? Because just the way you went about it as soon as I started shaking my head and and saying that When you said did you know and I started shaking my head?

No, I was disagreeing with with your claim that there were two sets of early church fathers, but Just just the way that you frame it and just the way that you the behavior around it

Just seemed like it was a dishonest attempt. Yeah, so it so just like if you have it and then back it up with evidence like let's have a

Wait, you're not doing that You're not backing up how that statement is dishonest You're saying the way now you're saying it's the way it was framed

Are you gonna play word games all night? Like you did last time or not? You're the one this is you're the one who's playing word games exact this is exactly the point just like Stop with the word games what you were doing and just present the evidence.

I'm using the word Honest and dishonest in in a very simple way. Let me define it for you

Honest means it seems like you're trying to play a gotcha game Yes, no one feels like because exactly what it was last time you did the same line of Argumentation Questions that you feel are gotchas and then you start playing word games.

You can't seem to answer simple questions This is why I'm asking a simple. Yes. No questions Let's just let's just bury the hatchet and move on that.

I won't I won't accuse you again of Being dishonest for what you did earlier

As you just imply the very same thing Wow, that is classic I this is this is funny

All right. So so let's let's let you play some more word games because I know you're going to because You know,

I'm not that I'm poisoning Okay Could you tell me what is the

Bible the Bible is a collection of books that were deemed to be

Not only inspired but they also fit another Category and Let's see that the

Bible would consist it would have to have 73 books for it to be considered the Bible and it was

Decided at three different councils And so the Bible would have to fit those categories that have to have 73 books

And it would have to be the books that were pronounced upon at the three councils and 382 393 and 397

Okay, so we didn't have a Bible until those three councils correct we did we we had the

Old Bible the Bible of the Old Testament But so it's a Bible or is that not the Bible that was the

Bible, but it's no longer the Bible The Bible now has to consist of 73 books so Okay, so you have a definition of the

Bible that Eliminates what you just said is the Bible, but you're not playing word games.

So you so Obviously changed so the Bible once referred to one thing now another so you have

Theology just just changes But when Vatican 2 comes along and it changes you don't like that change

So by what standard do you accept what is and isn't? Well, the difference is that Jesus Christ who's

God made a man came and appeared before us So more books were written about that to to be included as a part of the

Bible So now the Bible which once probably only included Genesis now includes all the other books

So it when Genesis was written was that the Bible? Yeah, that's what would be considered the

Bible at the time I didn't ask you at the time was that the

Bible see I asked You want to use the past tense for a word was so yes, it was the Bible.

Okay, so it's not anymore It's not the complete Bible. It's one of the books of the

Bible, but it's not the Bible is Genesis the Bible today It is not the Bible today.

So it's is it part of the Bible today? It is part of the Bible today Was it part of the

Bible when it was written when it was written, yes

I'm trying to find a way to break this down. So simple so you can't play games with you Yeah, there's probably a point there was there was a point when it was written that it was then accepted as the

Bible for sure Okay, how was the Gospels? Thank you. How was it accepted as the

Bible? There was probably uh, I mean there has to be some sort of standard where It meets certain criteria for being inspired it has to be inspired

Which is just one of the one of the Requirements is that it's inspired.

Yeah, but everything that's that not everything that's inspired is part of the Bible. Okay What do you mean by that?

What I mean is that the Word of God doesn't just refer to the Bible It refers to everything else that was spoken because the

Bible itself informs us that the Word of God is also the spoken tradition this is this is what the

Bible itself states and I can point to Okay, what else are you including when you're saying when you're saying

The Word of God, what are you including in that that's outside of the Bible? I want to make sure I understand you

Well, even the Bible itself states that Jesus performed Many other works and said many other things outside that weren't recorded in the

Bible. The Bible itself says that and then you have Two Thessalonians 2 15 which says therefore brethren stand fast and hold the traditions

Which you have been taught whether by word or by our letter so Clearly you reject the oral tradition and thus you reject the

Word of God And that was the second Thessalonians. What two Thessalonians 15 to 15 to 15, okay, so And you're so so what is this so you're saying that's tradition is the

Correct tradition. Okay. Yes, and so okay you go but I have some after yeah, so What was when when

Genesis was written? How did they know that was part of the Bible? I don't know if they called it the

Bible back then but they certainly recognized its its divine inspiration

Because it came from someone who is holy I Mean that's how we know that Moses's works were inspired was because Moses was clearly someone who's holy the people at the time recognized as miracles and then

His work his writings were accepted Because he was he himself was a holy person who's obviously graced by God Well, we know

I mean we know from within the New Testament that The it is, you know, the the

Old Testament is referred to as Scripture now would Scripture be the Bible Would you would you say that the

Scripture is Bible? Yeah, you'd see them as one in the same Yeah, sacred scripture refers to the Bible.

Okay sacred scripture refers to the Bible. Okay, I I'm just trying to make sure we can get some agreement.

So sacred scripture refers to the Bible So Genesis would be scripture, right?

Yeah, okay part of scripture it'd be okay part of scripture How did they how was it accepted at the time?

to be part of scripture I would imagine because whoever wrote it was a holy person who was

Performing miracles just like Moses So people tend to believe your writings when you're performing miracles

Well, you you you have I would agree because there's there's when there's new writing of Scripture there's three periods in history where we see miracles and all three of those periods had to do with new writing of Scripture so you have the time of Moses you have the time of Elijah and Elisha and you have the time of the

Apostles and I Have if anyone's interested just go to striving for turning org slash miracles.

I have a whole Message I did where I show you all the numbers and and have charts to show all through the four hundred four thousand to forty five hundred

Years of biblical history where all the miracles done by humans are and and you can clearly see it.

It's tied to the writing of Scripture Someone is asking in the chat if you could define holy

What do you mean by holy? Someone who's living according to God's will

Whether someone performs miracles or not does not necessarily indicate whether that person is holy certainly if you're performing

Miracles that only God can perform you're you're holy, but there's a lot of magicians nowadays who are who are literally levitating and transporting and performing all and walking on water and making hundreds of fish appear out of a bucket and See where people are actually doing that I can send you a video but there's there's people

I mean the Bible even talks about sorcerers Pharaohs wizards

Turned their stats or whatever. No. Yeah, they're their staffs into snakes or I think

Moses did that They're not Moses and in the Egyptians copy, right? Yes, but there was clearly

Wizardry occurring and this is this is a fact of our realities that there are people who are working with demons

Who are doing these sort of miracles? But they're not receiving this sort of power from God.

Okay, so So, let me just give a different definition of holy for that Just someone who's living according to God's will

Yeah, and and the thing is is with that word for holy fit for everything.

So when the When the tabernacle is referred to being holy Is is that I see is that something that's living for God's will it's

So holy in Hebrew has the idea of separation okay, so You I think what you're referring to in your definition of holy.

I don't think is a good definition of holy It's a good definition maybe of holy living

Yeah, the a life that's separated to God But it wouldn't be the definition of holy

Okay So, what would you propose? Yeah the definition why the definition of holy

I would say separation So if we're gonna be God is holy meaning he's separate from sin

We need to be holy in the sense that we're separate from the world We we have holy living as you did was what

I would say what you described when we live a life unto God That would be holy living

So maybe like designated by God could be a good definition of holy something that's been designated by God Well, I would

I just I would say I mean the word that we have in Hebrew for holy means separated Okay, you're

Jewish. So, you know, I Don't know It's not because I'm Jewish so that I would know

It's because that's what the because my just because I'm raised Jewish doesn't give me any greater authority to understand

Hebrew Oh, you didn't speak. Well, we did I was taught Hebrew, but just because I'm Jewish doesn't give me that right?

But it's what the word actually means We'll take your word for it.

I'm gonna bring in my co -host here Aaron Brewster who just popped in Aaron welcome

You have to unmute I Yes, I am. I am unmuted. I feel well glad to see you guys here tonight

Glad to be back who is joining us this fine evening. This is this is Sebastian Sebastian is a traditional

Roman Catholic He does not he doesn't believe the Basically and you correct me if I say some wrong

Sebastian he basically rejects The kind of the current Catholic Church since Vatican to correct

Would that be fair? Correct. Okay, I would reject the imposter organization that occupies the

Vatican Yeah Catholic Church and I do hope we can get into that more and I know

Alex is backstage and oh it is Wow It's a ready top of the hour. So we'll bring him in a moment

All right So but because I think we're getting somewhere and this is because the question tonight is did the

Roman Catholic Church give us the Bible which you would say? Yes, I would say no You you and I both agree that the book of Genesis when it was written

Was accepted as scripture as part of the Bible During some time for sure.

Okay. So the question that I'm asking now is Do and maybe you don't know do you know by what standard they would they would have had or how they would have accepted it as being from God right because a lot as I mentioned is probably we discussed already that is

Probably something to do with the fact that the people who wrote those books were themselves performing miracles that only someone who was given power by God could perform

Now to the books of the New Testament Not all the books in the

New Testament have a salvation message And so it's perhaps something that we you're gonna want to talk about as well but the book of Philemon for example was included in and in the old in the

New Testament and it doesn't have a salvation message and Just because it may have it yet.

They say it's written by Paul There's actually no way that you could say for sure without the oral tradition that it was indeed written by Paul So even someone who's a biblical scholar would have basically they couldn't say for sure

Okay, what what the books of the Bible are I want to stick I want to stick to this. Oh you you so You said that the they would have accepted it and Now I want to push this a bit you said because they they would have done miracles

But yet you also said there's people today doing miracles claiming to be of God They're false miracles, but okay.

So now how do you by what standard? Can you say something's a true miracle or a false miracle?

well, you you just have to look at things from a broad perspective, so You see someone for example, like Chris angel mind freak who is allowing himself to become possessed by evil spirits and then is levitating off the earth and is screaming and What could only someone could describe as the voice of demons where his voice literally sounds like there's multiple

Spirits within him and so any bystander looking From a distance could say well, obviously what that person is doing is beyond Natural, it's supernatural and it's also evil.

So you can people can make the distinction Do you have an objective standard by which?

Yeah, God is this is this is why I said they may not have known at the time which books were inspired but over time when when you see for example the

Jews and in the Old Testament conquer their enemies over time and It only happens when they're faithful and you see all these sort of miracles that that are tied together and you look at the common theme well, it's because they believed in this religion and so that's how we know that the

Religion of the Old Testament was valid was through these miracles that kept occurring throughout time and this took many thousands of years

And then Jesus, of course came and he Fulfilled the Old Testament and made us aware that yes, the

Jews were indeed God's chosen people We know I'm gonna keep trying this and folks that for folks watching listening.

Why do I keep doing this? well when when you're doing apologetics when you ask a question and Someone does what's called a red herring.

They never actually answer the question. They go off on a different tangent You what you don't want to do is fall for the bait of going off on two different tangent and ignoring

Yes, they can ignore the fact that they never answered the question that's the reason I keep coming back to the question over and over and over and reasking it and You do that so that the person will have to actually answer the question because you can't move forward in Conversation if a person doesn't actually answer questions

So I'm gonna ask it again to you Sebastian and I'm and I would like an answer to the question

Not a whole bunch of other things. So the question I had asked you is By what objective standard do you know?

I just told you the objective standard. That is the objective standard Okay, you didn't give me an objective saying you gave me a subject.

Why is that? Why is that subjective? Okay, you're saying that it's subjective to know if something's divinely inspired or not

Okay, so I'll ask it this way then You're saying Andrews that it's subjective to say why there's something is divinely inspired

You can't know for sure the way that you explained it by us looking over time

There's the Bible is it's a collection of books over thousands of years That's how it's finally inspired and you said it's because people do miracles

But then you're saying the way we know that other people who do miracles is a false miracle

Yeah, by what standard by the same ones one. They're different none of those people have died and risen from the dead and None of those people have healed

Back up because I'm not gonna let you just go off on a tangent to forget.

So you're saying that Genesis We wouldn't know that it is the

Bible until someone died and rose from the dead. Is that what you're saying? Oh There's like I said

Not just one it's you're you're trying to separate everything. It's not just this no, it's

That's what the Bible is what I'm trying to do is be precise with you so that you can see the errors of your ways

Because the whole problem you have is by your argument that we can't have a

Bible until we have a Catholic Church Then you can't claim we have any of the

Old Testament books because Genesis was written like 1 ,500 years before Jesus Christ and about 2 ,000 years before there was even a

Catholic Church To give us a Bible in your art. There was a church in the Old Testament.

It wasn't the Catholic Church, but there was a church Yeah, we could Know that's that I don't recognize that wasn't a church in the

Old Testament. They didn't have priests I know see you the priesthood is the Catholic Church trying to mimic the church.

Sorry There is a church in the Old Testament. Gotcha So they know

Which is Israel's church in the Old Testament it which came first Israel or the church?

Which church the church of the older the new? Okay, let's let's go with the

Roman Catholic Church. Did it exist before Jesus Christ? No, okay After Jesus Christ came and found it which one was first the nation of Israel or the

Roman Catholic Church the nation of Israel the nation of Israel, so Did it so did

Israel have priests? Yes, okay. So when the

Bible says we're a priesthood of believers meaning every believers a priest. Nope Okay And we got into this last time you're on the the in the

Old Testament the New Covenant is That we would there be a priesthood of believers, which is described in the

New Testament. So the the difference between the The nation of Israel and the church is that we wouldn't have priests anymore.

You're your church has why wouldn't we? Because we have a mediator now between God and man the man

Christ Jesus was we're a mediator before Getting it now you're getting it there was a mediator in the

Old Testament. They were called the priests In the New Testament, we don't need one because we have one mediator and that's

Jesus was already there the whole time So he was always there the scriptures the scriptures

Wasn't and he wasn't he wasn't he didn't come into time yet, but he was he was still there

He was part of the Father Son the Holy Spirit. That's true He was there but the the scriptures are clear though that his role not his role but his at the

Ascension That he entered into a new Roles that the word

I want to use but I know The one thing I want to question you on so you understand Sebastian's view from you know

Sebastian Sebastian is going to you know being you know, he's gonna have a little bit

I think of a different view with with that just But my own point that I bring is that To make the observation.

I'm just saying that from a logical perspective Even if you disagree with what the verses mean

You could understand how a person from my perspective would say yes Christ being eternal was in the

Old Testament He was not fulfilling the same mediatorial role that he is Post -crucifixion and that there are verses that would you know, that would

I would claim would substantiate that that that role It's not just a message

This is because that's the red herring what you did right there Okay, every time you got nothing to do with the question message.

Yeah, it has nothing to do with the question Oh, it's because there's clear parallels between the old and new and you're just you're just deciding which parts to know

I'm not no not I can say that Genesis was

Scripture when it was written and I agree that it was recognized as scripture when it was written

Which right there when you say that is the proof that we didn't need a Catholic Church To tell us what the

Bible is because it was recognized Immediately at the time by who?

By the people who are alive at the time by who? God's people the nation of Israel who were

God's people at the time. I just said the nation of Israel of Israel Pretty sure that they became

Christians at the time. They they were no longer Jews. They became

Christians, so you do realize that We're talking about the New Testament books. By the way,

I'm not talking about the Old Testament What part of Genesis you think is in the New Testament? I was talking about I'm not talking about Genesis.

We're talking. I know that's the game you're playing I am talking about Genesis throughout this program.

I keep Talking Genesis because I want you to see the error in your thinking because you keep having to jump to new tech like Understand some

Sebastian. I I care about it. I Didn't know you were talking about Genesis still we were talking about the

Roman Catholic Church And then we're talking about the people at the time. I thought we were talking about the Jews who had converted to Christianity Okay, but if you're talking about Genesis, I'm sure the people of Israel at the time who were a church

They were Yes, they were that the old the people of the Old Covenant were all a part of a unified religion.

They were a church Okay And there were leaders Do you know the first usage of the word

Ecclesia in history When was it? It was in Ephesus it referred to a

Basically, it was when they would have people come together for a vote. It was basically an election

It was the gathering together it was an open gathering for the purpose of voting

That was in Yeah, it's an assembly for voting. So that was in like two or three hundred

BC So you're gonna tell me that the Nation of Israel was the church before?

Church even existed before there was even the word for it. Is that what you're telling me? Yeah, they the people of Israel Most definitely were a church.

They they were the Church of the Old Testament. They weren't the Catholic Church They had a hierarchy.

They had David what okay? There was there was a top -down hierarchy in the Old Testament for sure.

And there was a why is it in? but why is it important for you to force a Newer concept that didn't exist at that time.

It comes from a completely different language Why is it important to force it on there where you have to you have to argue for the

English word church and the English What are you what are you trying to prove he's arguing for a

Is that there was an organization in the Old Testament that had hierarchy exactly?

No one's gonna argue that they were organized God created as a theocracy God created the largest No one's gonna argue that But that's and I agree

I agree with that but why does it have to be a church? Why do you have to call it a church? Well, because that's what it was it it was

It was called the keys. I'm not gonna call it an Ecclesia No, listen little old school in the comments made a good observation.

So Muslims as a unified religion equals a church Not not a

Christian church or not Okay, so is

Israel I'm cutting you off because you do these I and I know there's someone backstage they don't have leadership They don't have a hierarchy and not like yes, they do like it wasn't the

Old Testament or the new Absolutely, they do Who's the leader of them? Who's the leader of the

Muslims he moms decide on matters pertaining to faith and morals who makes? Yeah Just like Israel has priest just like Israel had priests they have emoms

Yeah in the Orthodox community has a bunch of different patriarchs, but they're not a unified church.

They're not a single church Have one person at the top who has everything that's otherwise

Okay, you know what? It's called when you have one person at the top a culture a cult

Okay, so who is David? Who is David in the Old Testament King? Okay He was where he's a king

And he was the king. He was the king of Israel. That's a government It wasn't a religious title do you realize it was

David designated by God to be the head of the Israeli people the Israelites, okay No, no, he wasn't

I'm gonna show you how it wasn't designated by God Over me. I will answer how because I'm being very precise and you aren't

I said he is a government leader He's not a religious leader. And what did he get in trouble for the

Bible describes David as just a government leader So if you will, let me finish you will get your answer.

Okay, what did David get in trouble for what did Saul get in trouble? for When they acted as a religious leader

When Saul's why was Saul's why did Saul have the kingdom ripped from him Sacrifice he wasn't allowed to do because he acted as a priest.

He did a sacrifice Okay, so well the kingdom was ripped away from him because he being a king of Israel tried to act like a priest of Israel and God condemned him for that and ripped the kingdom away from him

So the answer to your question is yes, there is a big difference between the two David was the king the government ruler.

In fact, the fact that Saul was in that position was also a condemnation Because when they when the people of Israel asked for a king

God said they're turning their back on him he had to comfort

Samuel because Samuel knew what they were asking for was was a was an

Anathema it was a curse. They were rejecting a Theocracy where God is the head.

So when you talk about a person at the head, that's not biblical

That's not what the spiritual nation would be Look at Moses who was

Moses So so this is so folks I want those of you watching listening to pick up what

I what just happened He got a clear answer. And what is Sebastian do? Well, what about this? Well, what about that?

And he's gonna do this. There's a theme in the Old Testament. I'm trying I'm trying to illustrate Bible is about If there was a theme as you say, then it would be consistent

You can't be consistent There's no consistent in the Old Testament of leaders who are designated by God to make

Yeah, so why why is it that we have judges Why is it that that even in it with Moses?

Did God tell Moses that he should be the ruler of all people? No He ends up he ends up getting 70 other men to do it

Right, so so again, the fact is I'm giving you the fact that the Bible Disagrees with you and all you could do is go.

What about this one? What about that one? What about this one? You're you're ignoring the fact that the ascent to the question that we have

Did the Roman Catholic Church give us the Bible you have agreed that the Bible?

We had a Bible when Genesis was written We had more of the Bible when

Exodus was written those were the Bible recognized at the time do we agree with that Yes, okay therefore

We do not need a Catholic Church to give us the

Bible we had it long before There was a Catholic Church You've agreed that Genesis was recognized as the

Bible you agree that Genesis written before the Catholic Church and that the Catholic Church in Your mind started when

Jesus came So we know we had the scripture before the

Catholic Church And I'll prove it I have evidence because first up and after that we're gonna bring in Alex who's in the backstage backstage so The the problem you're making is that you are on one hand

Accepting the tradition of the Catholic Church while also saying that you don't need that tradition when it was in fact the oral tradition

Determined the canon of the Bible And now you're calling me dishonest again,

I'm gonna show that you're the one being dishonest Well, can I just make a point here because when hold on no because I'm not gonna let you do this again

When Genesis was written did the Catholic Church exist No, but we're not talking about Genesis that's the whole point you you you keep playing this game

Book the only book that I'm talking about as being part of the Bible that is in this discussion is

Genesis That's it About we're talking about the Bible about Genesis, that's it

Show is did the Roman Catholic Church give us the Bible Genesis when

Genesis was written was it recognized as scripture? Yes, or no

I don't know when it was recognized Like I said, there are books that maybe take may have taken a longer time to be recognized as divinely inspired

So I don't know when it was recognized But at some point it was recognized the fact is that Christ refers to it as scripture that that the disciples were referred to To the

Old Testament should probably be an indication that it's divinely inspired, right? So would that would that indicate that they knew it was scripture before?

The Roman Catholic Church before we have a church before Jesus was ascended Yes Because there were people in the

Old Testament there were authorities in the old the Old Testament period who decided in which books were in Inspiring fine.

I'm gonna I'm gonna agree. I disagree with that Somewhat, but I'm gonna decide was there just a democratic election and they all just voted on which books.

No, that's Catholic Church did you had a you had a meeting you had a council where they voted on it, right?

That's what the Roman Catholic Church did. They had a meeting What do you think happened in the Old Testament?

Probably the same thing they had You're saying probably because it's wishful thinking the the

You have no other way of deciding how it would have happened. Really? No, no other possible. There's no other possible way even though you

Would you yourself gave possible ways in this episode in in earlier you actually said

Maybe it was that they is because they did miracles, right? Maybe it was because there were there were seeing things that God was doing so you already gave other ways

I but who who who decided who had the final say? Why do I have to have final say what do you mean?

Why could it not be the fact that as we see in Romans chapter 1 that everyone knows

God exists Such that when they hear God's Word, they know it's God's Word. Well, I'll answer that so in the force up until the fourth century

When the Canon of Bible was finally determined there were books that were accepted in some

Christian communities as divinely inspired but rejected in others, so I have a bit of prepared material here for free to read

Okay No Yeah and by the way When you say that you we have to we have to recognize that the the books you're claiming were added in the 1500s

No, they weren't And I'll get to that as well. Yeah, but that's also a lie I'm gonna be

I'm just gonna be really straight right now You call me a liar one more time and I'm banning you from the show because I'm getting sick and tired of it

All right, you claim that the books were were okay. So let's address this right now

Okay, here's that these books were added. I am muting you so you you're not gonna talk over me on the show

Okay, you can keep I see your mouth going. No one's hearing you a lie is when someone is saying something that is not true

The fact that you're saying that you think I don't know something is not a lie When you're saying

I'm being dishonest as you've said throughout When I'm not when I'm asking you a yes -or -no question, you don't want to answer it.

That's not dishonest That's you not wanting to answer So I'm not gonna put up with it any any longer.

Call me a liar one more time and you're out of here Is that clear? As you have written books and you you should have you should know better But you continue to say these things that those books weren't added in the 15th century and I'll explain why

Are you aware that the New Testament books? Quote the Septuagint Over 300 times.

Did you know that? wait Do you what is the

Septuagint? I want to see if you said this has to do with because the seven books that you claim were added in the 15th century

Were in the Septuagint The Septuagint is a

Greek translation of the Old Testament, right? and The rabbis in history have never accepted the books that you've added as part of Scripture Yes, there's other books that are translated.

I have a lot of books Um, I I have I have books from Martin Luther that were translated from German Does that mean that if I have another book that's translated from German to English that that they're at the same

Like if one was was inspired the other must be okay So translated the

Septuagint is a Greek translation of the Old Testament Which was completed a few centuries before the birth of Jesus Christ Yes, clearly clearly it was accepted as part.

No Because because the rabbis hey as we I said last time the Council of Jamnia They rejected those all rejected later.

When when did they reject it? Well, the Council of Jamnia was 70 AD 70

AD but yet the Christian writers of the New Testament quoted the Septuagint over 300 times

Yes, because they quoted Yeah, did they quote from the books you're claiming that's what

I'm saying that's exactly what I was gonna ask yes Okay, which books? What so we're in the

New Testament Coming from those apocryphal first and second Maccabees Those all show up in the

New Testament text as being quoted Yes Chapter and where yeah

We're in the New Testament. Can we see a quote coming from an apocryphal book? because the only one that you're gonna be able to argue would be

Enoch where it refers to a book of Enoch and We don't know when that was, you know where he refers to Enoch we don't know

What Enoch might have had and I don't think there was even writing in the time of by time So if I can put back to the

New Testament books You have some books quoted from the books that were removed and you would have you would have to agree with my position no,

I wouldn't I only if you'll agree that that if if Paul Was to refer in Titus as he does to one of the he says in in Titus chapter 1 verse 12

One of these a prophet of their own said Cretans are all liars and evil beasts Are you now going to take the words of of Crete the the

Cretan? I forget his name offhand But the Cretan poet and are you gonna say he's inspired because he's quoted in the

New Testament is Everything that you know, but we're talking about the Apostles themselves.

I want you to be consistent You cannot say that just because it's Apostles were divinely inspired.

This is an apostle writing this in in Titus. Is he not? Titus is quoting a

Cretan a Cretan poet does that mean that everything the Cretan poet wrote or anything else even if he's what the rest of what he

Wrote is is that inspired is that scripture because he quotes it? Okay, but these were books that were in the

Septuagint. Don't say okay, but don't say okay, but it's a yes -or -no question

Just I'm I want you to stay consistent just because it's quoted because I just I don't understand

I don't understand your line of reasoning. So just because Jesus and the Apostles quoted Let me make it simple for you your argument that you're making is the fact that the

New Testament writers quote these Apocryphal books means it must be scripture. Is that your argument?

Yes, that means that They they consider those books to be scripture

And then you're saying that some some Jewish rabbis in 70 AD decided that they weren't So we should just believe that those books are no longer scripture

Sebastian Sebastian Try to listen to what someone's telling you Instead of trying to answer them.

You're so busy trying to give me an answer. You're not trying to listen So I'm gonna try I'm trying to make this as simple so you can understand and we got a lot of questions for you

And we got some backstage that has questions. So I'm gonna ask again Is that do you agree that your argument is?

That just because they're quoted in the New Testament It means that they must be accepted as scripture.

Is that your argument? Yes, I am saying that yes, but Jesus and the

Apostles quote the books that were once accepted as Scripture in the Old Testament, then we should also accept those books as being sacred scripture

Yeah, and now it's see this thing. They were once accepted. They were never accepted

That's a that is a position you hold to you haven't proven But now I'm gonna use your argument to say the fact that the

Bible quote It only it only quotes other books and that were inspired Then then then in Titus chapter 1 verse 12

Then the the author of the the Cretans that wrote Cretans are always liars evil beasts lazy gluttons

That that person I forget his name offhand But that author every what he wrote was also scripture.

Is that what you're arguing? No, clearly not but that is argument when it comes to the these other books

So so you just threw out your argument So now it doesn't matter if the

New Testament does quote one of the apocryphal books because you've just thrown out that argument Okay So then and on the flip side you think that they're not inspired because some

Jewish rabbis and 70 AD who reject Christ Say that those books are I'm saying

That's your other. No, that isn't my argumentation is that they that we have the accepted books.

It was never accepted There's plenty of books that get translated. We have lots of books

They've been accepted for the first 1500 years of Christianity. And then you said that they were they were 1500 you said those seven books were added when they were used in worship for the first 1500 years of Christianity So they were never seen as canon.

Yes, they were they were they were officially codified in 1500 but they were always considered canon

They were officially codified and in that first council that you talk about the books were not seen as scripture so so okay,

I'm gonna because I In in Nisan in 3 what 324 325?

I'm pretty sure that in 390 so here's 7 they did recognize those books as being

Yeah The later council making my point beautifully. Thank you I'm gonna bring

Alex in because I know he's been backstage for a while has questions. I just want for folks to realize

And actually, mr. Tracy has a great question. He's saying who gave us the spittoon. Yeah, those same those same

Jewish rabbis that You're you're not the same Jewish rabbis Yeah, these were these were

Jews the Jews in 70 ad were Jews who rejected Christ They didn't accept God's Revelation that the

Jews of the Old Testament did that's the difference Oh, wait, all Jews in the Old Testament did all Jews in the

Old Testament accepted Christ Well, they accepted God's Revelation I'd say it's all over and I said except the

God's Revelation which would include Which would include the coming of Christ all of them?

I'm gonna keep asking all of them all Jewish people the ones who believe in the God God of the

Bible We qualify it. Oh now it's now it's qualified those who believe in God. Ah, okay. So now it's not all

It's amazing how quickly you flip when you look because you have to you have to make a distinction between Jews Yes, technically

Jews and Jews who actually are Jews You're playing believe in heresies you're not a

Christian and that's not a Christian that's why that's why that's why Jesus said If you don't believe that out, what do you say?

If you don't believe in me something along those lines Alex what questions do you have for us tonight? I don't even know where I want to go right now there

I've been taking notes the whole time and there's just so many different avenues Hello Sebastian, I said nice to meet you.

Hi, what's your name Alex Alex? I'm actually writing a paper right now in the damning gospel of Roman Catholicism Well This is gonna be fun.

Yeah, so I've been studying Catholicism a lot so how long have you been a

Catholic I Converted probably around two or three years ago

Just two or three. How old are you? If you might ask I'm 27. What did you come from a mask?

from Well, it was kind of a long journey I was baptized Catholic and then

Follow way then I was a Vatican to sect adherent and then

I became atheist and then I became like a Protestant for a while and then well before that I was like a

Jordan Peterson person and then became kind of like a Protestant and then I came back to the apostate church and then

I found out about the true Catholic Church, so When you refer to apostate church, what do you what are you referring to?

I'm referring to the organization that currently occupies the Vatican and Proclaims to be the

Catholic Church, but actually is leading everyone to apostasy Okay, let me ask you another question.

Are you a fan of Nick Fuentes? He says some true things but he's a heretic and he swears a lot on his show

Catholic people that are fans of him. He's not a Catholic and he also discouraged his followers from voting for Trump, but by what standard do you keep declaring who isn't isn't a

Catholic what You didn't answer my question by what

I Can I can say they're not Catholic because there's a definition of what

Catholicism is and they don't know There you go. Yeah, there's a definition of what Catholicism and we know what constitutes a

Catholic and when someone so what is that? They're not a Catholic. I'm gonna ask you again by what standard

Do you have to say people are not Catholic the same standard? You just said there's a definition

Okay, and so there's certain requirements you have to meet in order to Yeah, yeah, what's the definition?

So for for for example, you have to reject False councils like Vatican to you have to you have to and by the way

Is that where is that? stated in the definition Prior to Vatican to that you have to reject false councils.

I'm sure there's Do you currently attend a

Catholic Church I Don't attend a mass But I am a part of the

Catholic Church. You are you are looking at someone who is a part of the true Catholic Church okay, but so you don't attend a like a

Building you don't go into a building for a mass or not at the moment. No, there's none near me that Hold the correct positions

It's interesting By the way, this isn't a this isn't a completely unique time in history if you get are you guys familiar with the

Aryan crisis Yeah, I'm also I'm also familiar when there were three popes so, you know guys, you know, you guys say there was a

Line of papal succession that I guess is broken there plenty of times you're calling

Clearly if they're not if there's three people claiming to be popes and and a pope by definition is a singular person who hold his office

And presides over the entire church Then the other two cannot be popes.

So that's that's that's another sort of word play that They Yeah, but but the thing is is that you said that the church

Catholic Church you hold to the papacy and yet there There isn't a papacy right now Yeah, what happens when a pope dies there's an interregnum sometimes for a few years

So would you say that there is no Catholic Church right now? I'm saying that there is a

Catholic Church But there's just far less Catholics But you said the

Catholic Church requires the papacy and there is no papacy Yeah, there is there's no one in the seat.

It's empty and there's been plenty of periods What what do you think happens when a pope dies? There's there's sometimes a year or two where there's no one in that seat

It's called an interregnum or just an extended interregnum. Okay, so but there's

Supposed to be a succession from Peter to today Right hand it off. So it

If we if you don't have a Pope, how do you have that Succession because the chair still exists the office of the papacy still exists and really quick You guys asked me for how

I'm able to authoritatively state whether someone is a heretic This is from Pope Pius the ninth first Vatican Council section 3 chapter 2 on Revelation in 1870

Quote hence also that understanding of its sacred dogmas must be perpetually retained which

Holy Mother has once declared and There must never be a recession from that meaning under the specious name of a deep and deeper understanding and so it's with that authoritative statement that I as a

Catholic can say that When the Vatican to Council is trying to tell me that Muslims worship the

Christian God and that Christians worship Muslim God That that council is preaching heresy and needs to be rejected.

Yeah, but but you said that That that doctrine could change. No, I didn't

You did it's very beginning of the show. I said that books could be added to the Bible We know before we got into talking about that Yeah, he's very double -minded he's gone back and forth on so many position.

Yeah He doesn't I say that when did I say that doctrine can change

Early in early in the show you you we were talking about different things and you were saying that that it could change

And you misheard me. I said that doctrines must be I'll go back in Cannot change and that it's

Bishop Barron because we're talking about Bishop Barron presumably and he's the one who's saying that doctrines can basically change

But but he but he is saying that he's the one that is that is adhering to doctrines, but he's not he's

Vatican to if you if you believe in Vatican to you believe that doctrines can change Because they're teaching new doctrines that contradict everything that the church is taught for the past 2 ,000 years

Was do you believe okay? I think I think Pope John Paul II when he when he began do you believe he was a pope?

He was Okay, he preached heresy

I think even in his books prior to even being elected to that position, but he was an antipode and he was

I mean the very notion that he he was even elected would presuppose that the institution

Electing him was also the Catholic Church with which they weren't so it's all just it's just a big farce.

It's fake It's an imposter organization Let me ask you a question who else

Believes what you believe? Oh, there's many of the cantus. Yeah, there's many say to spell it out for you.

They don't cantus Yeah Alex you you can See de

If you're studying Catholicism, they don't cantus It's yeah

Latin words say de s e de the Conte which means empty bacon v a c a n t so Alex if you go to calm org, which

I know, you know, click He deals with the the state of campus We used to have them we actually had a number of when we started this program many years ago

We had a number of state of campus that used to come in here weekly So it's been it's been a long time

Just real quick d is asking the the Sebastian attend mass weekly he already answered that and said no

No, there's no valid masses near me Yeah, I want to touch on something do you do you believe the

Bible is the Word of God Yes, and I also believe that tradition is the Word of God Okay, so you yeah, it's

Bible and tradition. Yeah, okay But you made a comment earlier about the Word of God What what was that you accept oral tradition as the

Word of God? Except the Bible is the Word of God, but why not Bible tradition? Because there's no way of proving what that oral tradition is.

Yeah Well, I can read out to you from the Bible it it commands us to accept oral tradition

Yeah, it's Thessalonians 2 15 and I'll read it out it is

Therefore brethren stand fast and hold the traditions which you have been taught whether by a word or by our letter

Well, the letter is clearly the Gospels and the books of the New Testament. Here's the thing We don't have that oral tradition anymore because we do of course we do.

What do you think dogmas are? What do you think the writings of the church councils are so so let me put it this way

When when in Islam you have the Quran and with their belief of the Quran it was an oral tradition

It was passed down from Muhammad 18 years after he died they realized during a war that they were you know

Had a whole bunch of their soldiers that had died. They were afraid of losing the the Quran the oral tradition

So they wrote it down and they all ended up discovering that they all had different versions of the oral tradition

The only way you can know for sure is that it's written down and when you have it written down you can then compare it

That doesn't even make sense. Why why would that be the only way? Because you if you have you ever played the telephone game

Yeah Okay, that's your oral tradition if anything in that you don't know because there's no way to compare it

But the church existed before the Bible is for as much as 60 years The church the gospel writings rather the gospel writings rather exists didn't exist until 60 years

Okay, wait, let's go back to that's one of those red herring things, but no, it's not He doesn't all time

I don't even know what a red I just want to make an observation here.

Okay, because you're second Thessalonians passage, right? One of the things

I have noticed with you submission I think you and I have been on another show together. Is that correct? When you're talking about Mary being the ark, okay

Yep one of the things that I've noticed you is that you take words and You cram a ton of meaning into them that don't we belong there?

The word well, I'm just saying just so as an example From the second

Thessalonians passes the British that Greek word literally just means something that is handled down. Okay handed down to somebody else

Whether by word of mouth and then of mouth, of course Obviously is italicized there in our scriptures because that's that we it's it's to help us understand.

It's not actually there It's word or letter, right? But what was what was the word?

We don't know what the word was You say that it's dogmas you say that it's things that have been the traditions that have did the

Catholic Church now holds to But what if the word? Was just what they were teaching that came from The script people didn't have their own copies of the scripture some people had letters so some churches

The books as much as 60 years after Christ I'm not missing the point because the point that I was trying to make there was 30 to 60 years when there wasn't even a

Bible so you don't know what I'm trying to make though is recognizing what you were saying

You went to second Thessalonians, right to talk about oral tradition And I'm answering that point that you made okay, so the point you made about oral traditions you which you pulled from second

Thessalonians and crammed into traditions and Crammed into the word word is that that has to mean the continuing traditions held by the correct

Roman Catholic Church today But that's not what those words means. That's not what that verse refers to there could be lots of different meanings

Lots of different things. So I'm just saying you have a tendency to do that Of all of your predecessors, but I think for sure because st.

John chrysostom Actually quotes this in 398 and then he says from this it is clear that they did not hand down everything by letter

But there was much also that was not written like that which was written the unwritten too is worthy of belief regard the tradition of the church also as from a

Christian from the year 398 years ago Wasn't inspired

Sebastian I want to do one thing with Sebastian Sebastian Sebastian I am going to give you

I'm gonna take the way you read the Bible and I'm gonna give you a verse that condemns your whole argument and I can do the same so I know

Anything that you're saying you you have well has no authority you have absolutely no authority for anything that you're saying you reject what

Christians Word to you.

I'm gonna read God's word to you. Does that have authority of course, but not not if you reject

Colossians church turn to Colossians chapter 2 verse 8 Well, let's see what the

Bible says about tradition. It says see that See to it that no one takes you captive through philosophy and empty deceptions according to the tradition of men

Rather than according to Christ that's literally about Protestant tradition. That's what Protestantism fits that perfectly

Years after Christ, so so you're saying this was written as a prophecy for something that didn't exist for 1 ,500 years

Yeah, do prophecies not exist in the Bible Okay, is that what you're saying? Because it's not written as a prophet as a prophecy.

It's clearly it's clearly meant to Indicate that there would be people like yourselves who completely

Explain Sebastian explain something to me if that's

I'm gonna go with it. So you're gonna say this is a prophecy Then why did they choose imperative?

It's an indication. Okay How about how about you keep your mouth shut and listen long enough to know what the question is

Okay, if if you want to say it could be a prophecy explain to me then the two words here that are that we have okay, as takes and Captive and captive take you captive.

Okay These two what we have are two verbs that are present active

If Parsippo so if they are present active What that means in Greek is that it was present at the time

Not future in Greek if this was a prophecy it would be future This is present and it's active meaning something they have to do.

They had to presently do this to that that this tradition

Presently actively takes people captive. There's no way this could refer to something 1 ,500 years later

By the way, the Greek language works. That's God's Word I'm sorry, if you don't like it, but what that first says is

The very this condemns the very thing you're saying that we should hold to tradition This says that we shouldn't allow tradition to take us captive as you have been taken captive by your tradition

I haven't I use both scripture and tradition to support my arguments. You don't because Okay, can

I even propose that right after I read to Thessalonians 215 which clearly want to go back.

Let's go back to second Thessalonians If you go back to the beginning of the chapter thing about second Thessalonians I said a thing about it, but then you told me

I was in the wrong Well, no, I don't Because you guys are wrong and that's

I what a story being secretive about that I Hasn't been wrong this whole time by what authority?

My well based off of sacred scripture and sacred tradition the two things that you're supposed to hold in my store

But you reject one of those. So what I'm left with is self -interpretation. No you you actually I okay

I'm gonna prove to you again. Like I did last time that you reject the authority of scripture very simple Sebastian Can I read scripture without tradition?

without the Catholic Church the Magisterium and tradition you can but if you if you interpret it away if you interpret it in a way that contradicts

Sacred tradition then you're clearly you're clearly interpreting it wrong. Okay, so so therefore

Tradition is a greater authority than the Bible. I'm not saying it's greater, but it precedes the

Bible This is the point I'm making is that the oral tradition precedes the Bible So we need tradition and the church to interpret the

Bible, right? Yes Okay, therefore your tradition and your church are a greater authority than God's Word That is

God's Word The church is not God's Word the tradition the oral tradition is

God's Word That's what you don't know the tradition is because it was never written down It doesn't matter it's an oral tradition it's still valid.

Okay, let me ask you a question Where does the Bible say that it needs to be written down for it to be valid? It doesn't say that it's just common sense, but right that's why we got a telephone game

On top of that is the mission I will even hold on the Word of God is

Word, do you follow the Mishnah? The Mishnah Tradition of the

Jewish people that were written down. Do you follow that? That's the oral tradition.

They say Because it's the oral tradition of the of the

Jews of the Old Testament that that gave us the books of the Old Testament But that's the oral tradition here.

All right, just a quick question here What's interesting and there's a there's a catch -22 to all of this.

Okay, I'm a Christian Do I get to just Speak tradition and I know the answer is no, of course

You don't agree with that because if you did agree that I would just speak right now and I would start a tradition that says

You're wrong, and I'm right, but you know that you wouldn't accept that right? However, and I know that the

Catholics have lots of rules About who gets to be the person who gets to create tradition who gets to just speak

They say well that has to be followed But the problem with that is you got a lot of people speaking

That's why he read from Colossians chapter 2 verse a that there was that there is a lot of tradition of men

There are a lot that that raised themselves up against Christ that needs to be torn down in an obedience to Christ There's a lot of things like that.

So one of the issues with oral tradition and there's lots of them this is just one tiny one is the fact that Who gets to say that the tradition that was passed down came from a reputable source?

And this is just one one small There's many many of them, but it's a big problem with oral tradition because you don't know

Who said that thing that supposedly we're all supposed to submit to and whether that person was trustworthy

Well, this is where discernment comes in and this is why it requires people Holy people who are living the holy lives in accordance with God's will to make these sorts of decisions

And that's what you see it has been with the Catholic Church. These are these are Saints These are people who have lived.

Why don't you agree though that the Catholic Church that different different popes? Have said things that have contradicted what previous popes have said no

There's no if you believe that and point me to a single dogma It's prep past dogma and I have done that with Vatican too

And that's why I can say that Vatican too is invalid because it contradicts previous previously defined dogma

So so here's the thing and I got like I get over a dozen questions that people have been asking

I want to I want to try to get to these I have another hour if that's what you want.

Yeah, so so here's it. Here's the thing um what we're trying to try to help you see right is and And I I get that you're blinded by this

You can't see this and I I get it because I've dealt with other people that are in cults And I know you don't like me saying you're in a cult

But it is a control that they have over you see there's no one that has control over me other than God There's no there's no authority over me telling me what

I must believe you don't have any authority at all. That's the problem I do I said

I didn't have no authority at all for anything that you say He doesn't even hear what you're saying.

No, he doesn't that's the whole thing. He's very blinded You're not even listening. You're so quick to your all you're doing is trying to answer

Things that you think we're saying or things that you wish we'd say and you're not answering what that's what that's why you look so foolish like I'm sure that everybody is

Proverbs 15 5 a fool despises his father's instruction, but whoever heeds reproof is proof.

Oh Andrews my rabbi now It's like you really this is this is just taking too long and you guys are kind of just bad during around the point

Okay, so you you stated that? Okay, everything needs to be written down, right

Are you aware that the Bible wasn't even mass distributed until the 15th century and that virtually no one had access to it?

Isn't that kind of? quoting scripture Again, this goes back to you. Do you even believe the

Bible's the Lord again? I don't even think you do Already that I do Alex and if you're not willing to take my work for things then what's the point of even debating the role of a?

scribe It's someone that Writes down.

What was someone assignment right now? No, I'm being very specific in the in the the

Old Testament What was the role of the scribes? So this is long before the 15th century the role of the scribes on historical events.

Nope What was it? You're also referred to in New Testament as lawyers to write the scripture

Every so you're saying no one would have access to have a So I don't virtually so let's see if that's true there's two things required to open a synagogue so after the

Israel is dispersed and they go and start the the Rabbinic Judaism with with the synagogues two things are required to open a synagogue.

Do you know what they are? You had to have ten Jewish men and a copy of the scriptures that were given from a scribe

So you're saying they have virtually none but every Jewish town had a synagogue

Which meant they all had access to the scripture in the Old Testament Yeah, these books were read in public worship out loud

You had their own version listen Understand son what you've been doing throughout this is you've been making claims and you just say everyone's wrong if they don't agree with you

And what you believe You say things you say things that are just completely untrue by the way

Where was I'm gonna look here Jeff earlier Jesse put this one up for you He went to AI task was there two sets of the early church fathers

AI says yes The early church fathers are generally divided into two categories the anti nice Ian and the post nice Ian So what you have there?

Are you referring to Andrew? Yeah Because I was doing something called a live stream

Because I didn't have time to look it up because I was doing something called a live stream

I mean, so so so someone else looked it up and notice I want everyone to notice notice that when he's when he's given evidence

What does he do? Does you see him going? Oh, I'm sorry. I was wrong. No, he just goes Okay, why didn't you just do that?

The the fact is comes pejorative Yeah, because the the implication that you're making is that they had some sort of contrary views, but they didn't

So you can say sure they're an anti nice Ian and whatever nice Ian fathers But they all believe they're all part of the same church the same organization

They all have the same views and yet the they're the same books that have parts edited out.

What are you talking about? Okay, so the early church fathers wrote and then what we end up having is

Later, you have people that the Catholic version where it's edited

That's not the original early church fathers It's so you have some of the same books that are edited out

So when you say that it goes all the way back That's because you're only looking at an edited version of the early church fathers

So you can't even know what your tradition is the broad claim unless you have a specific example

I'm not even sure what the point of saying that is so here so with you mean to give me an example of some sort of contradiction that occurred and He you

I have to do it right now, right? You don't have to we can we can talk further an email but I'm just saying if you're gonna make that sort of claim then like It doesn't mean anything to you because you are held captive by your tradition

And you you are the one who's held captive by your own man -made tradition is the point that I'm making

My tradition comes from a long line of Christians who believe in me. What is my name?

Since I'm my tradition. The only thing I'm holding to is the Bible. I don't I'm not holding to a tradition So that's your tradition that started in the 15th century after the

Bible was mass starts. Oh, here comes the Reformation argument okay, so My tradition so sure was

No one even have my if you're gonna argue that if you're gonna argue that my tradition goes back to Leviticus I'm going back to Leviticus.

That's where I get the gospel from was was there a Reformation in the time of Leviticus? No Okay, it's

Leviticus that sells that would teach us that we can't be saved by by man, but only by God and God alone

That's in Leviticus was Huh Ain't God alone

Yeah, and God alone. God alone is No work. No works faith and works or Yeah, if you're if you're a

Christian you will avoid sin That's that's a good work and you will you will you wouldn't be encouraged to do things that help you avoid sin

That's after regeneration. We're talking regeneration baptismal regeneration or No, just regeneration just being converted

Okay, so we're talking about baptismal regeneration no, we're not not baptismal regeneration baptism is a work yeah

Yes Okay, so yes point of regeneration when someone goes from being an enemy of God to a child of God Okay, is that our works required?

Or is it faith alone? Yeah, it requires repentance Is that a work?

Yes Okay, I feel sorry for your sin it is is something that you actively need to try to do

It does repentance mean to feel sorry for your sin It's a change of heart

No, it isn't. Do you know what the word metanoia means? Let's look up what repentance means

Well look up what the word metanoia means Okay, but we're talking about the word repentance that is the word repentance in the

Greek Repentance means it's a change of mind a reorientation fundamental transportation transformation of outlook

Yeah, so it's not a change of heart It's a change of mind. It's a change of thinking. It's it has to do with our sin nature turning from a self to God So but but you believe that's a work and yet the scriptures teach that we are saved not as a result of works

Yeah, it does say that we're saved their works and Where does it say that give me a second?

Are you thinking maybe James chapter 2? We're talking about Christ's Urging his followers to cut off occasions of sin in Matthew 29 5 29 30

Okay, right. I won't be pluck it out and cast it from thee. And if they're right, it's not talking about Is he speaking to believers there is

Christ speaking to his followers his believers Yeah, he's speaking to the disciples the

Apostles are there right So again, we're talking regeneration not sanctification

You see I'm trying to be precise with you and simple so you could see Sebastian I feel bad for you.

I really do because You are so blind and you don't see it and I know you don't see it Because because this tradition has taken you captive and that's why my heart breaks for you

Okay, let me ask you this. You're shaking your head. No Could you be wrong about what you believe?

No, I am fully convinced and I'm completely firm in my thought because I have conviction

Because you have conviction. Have you ever been wrong in your conviction before in your entire life?

There well, of course, but okay, so how do you Actively try to unsee it.

Okay. How do you know you can't be wrong in this conviction if you've been wrong in other convictions?

Well, I can ask you the same thing. I can answer it Okay, because my authority is

God's Word not myself mine. No, it isn't you just said Tradition is God's Word and the

Bible even says that you didn't say that you said your conviction So I'll ask the question again, could you be wrong about your

Conviction about your belief. Everything I believe is completely substantiated by a Bible and by what

Christians have believed for the past 2 ,000 years Okay, it's substantiated How do you know it's completely substantiated?

There's no room for And I would imagine you would you would believe the same thing. Otherwise, why are you asking me?

Well, there's there becomes a difference Because what you're doing is you're you're let's take for example this discussion of regeneration in this discussion of regeneration

I'm we're Alex and I are asking about that point when you go from being an unbeliever to a believer

You twice. I Misunderstood. Okay Yeah, in order to become a believer you have to receive the gospel message

That's that's one of one of the requirements you have to receive Requirements. What's that?

What are the other requirements? well, of course you would have to Repent for your sin

For your passions. Is that a work? Yeah, because it involves confessing

Which is what the Bible teaches It's a changing of the mind it has nothing to do with what you say

Okay, but Christians have always confessed their sins to a priest So it has nothing to you you see this is this is the point and I encourage you to go back and listen to yourself

To see how many times we ask the very specific question. You answer son totally unrelated You keep doing the red hair related because it's you have to understand the big picture here

You're you're trying to your thinking is like this, but that's not what the Bible it's not how you read the

Bible. It's Sebastian let me let me ask you a picture thing. Let me ask you a question. Are all your sins forgiven right now?

I if I were to go to confession right now to a priest and Receive absolution to a validly ordained one at that then my sins would be forget

So when I'm gonna ask you when are your sins forgiven? Yeah at the point that the priest absolved them okay, um,

I Might be wrong about that. Maybe I don't know if it's

I don't know if it's as soon as they're committed or It's after they're absolved, but you can't you can't go to heaven unless Your sins are absolved by a priest you could you read to me?

Colossians chapter 2 verse 13 This is just going off tangent

No, actually, it's not. What is it to Colossians? Colossians chapter 2 in verse 13

And we spend this time with you because we love and care for you I mean I could be playing with my baby and eat my dinner

Yeah Yeah, I'm the same way. I Hope and pray for you guys to come out of your blindness

Okay, read that read the verse. Well, can you read it? Um, you have it in front of you anyway It says when when you were dead in your trespass transgressions and Uncircumcision of your flesh

He made you alive together with him having forgiven us all our transgressions

Having canceled out the certificate of debt Consisting of the decrees against us

Which was hostility to us now? How many transgressions does he say that are he's taking care of here?

Is it some of them all of them? I don't know.

It says having forgiven us all our transgressions So how many I was reading something else at the same time, but okay that and this is what you've been doing throughout

The show is not paying attention to what we're saying and and it's saying because you're so you're looking to respond

Well, likewise, it's been it's been going both ways. So It hasn't because we've been able to identify where you you're not listening and yeah, and every time

I respond It's oh you go off on a tangent. Oh, that's red herring. So you do but the point is that these are valid responses

Have I misrepresented at any point your belief system have

I said what you believe and and Described it inaccurately. I Yeah, when we were talking about Vatican to Earlier in the show and you were confusing the different Pope's Yeah, you don't you don't understand why

I'm really so are you saying that I said that you believe in Vatican to in the current Pope?

Because I You're misrepresenting The church. Okay, but you're talking about my beliefs

I would say you've been you've been pretty pretty accurate in representing my beliefs why that is I actually listen to you and Yet over and over again.

We you mean Alex said the same thing earlier You're not listening because you keep misrepresenting you're trying to answer before you even get there

Because it's just so it's just so heretical I'm compelled to it's it's almost impossible to just come keep

I want to make sure I understood this correctly. You're saying that we're so heretical that you have to misrepresent us.

Is that I'm Representing guys, I know clearly what you guys believe

I know I know exactly what you guys believe clearly you don't I Do okay, then why do you keep misrepresenting it?

What am I misrepresenting exactly? Well, it was presented what we believe about what repentance the word means

You missed you misrepresented what we mean by works you misrepresent what we mean by by regeneration

I didn't misrepresent. I just think that your guys's interpretation is wrong. That's all okay.

What let's let's this be fun What is my what is my? Representation understanding of regeneration

That it doesn't require confession to a priest That it's something that is just automatically that you can still go to heaven and not have to confess your sins

That's basically what you believe. So Sebastian, I want you to listen very clearly Okay It's not ever the way that I would describe regeneration

In fact, if you were listening I described it Three times it is the point in time when we become go from being an enemy of God to a child of God when we go from being an unbeliever to being a

Believer when we go from having a dead heart to a living heart We go from being being someone that is an enemy of God to having and being a new creation.

That's how I describe it Notice none of those words and I described it this way two times prior at least

Not once did you even hear how I described it to give you the definition and you misrepresent what

I said By I saying what? By saying that I'm talking about that.

It doesn't require confession Do you believe that in order to be one with God you need confession?

Well Romans 10 You do okay, so you understand that if you would have to a priest so We believe in confession to God.

Yeah, so that's how you have to add the word. Here's what Scripture says that he says Romans 9 10 and 9 10 9 and 10 had you shut your mouth long enough and and not try talking over me

You would have heard me tell you what I believe It's right from Scripture that if you confess with your mouth that Jesus is

Lord and believe in your heart That he has raised from the dead you will be saved for with the with the heart one believes

Resulting in righteousness and with the mouth one confesses resulting in salvation I don't see anywhere in the in this verse that says anything about a priest, but do

I believe that confession? Yes, I believe that you have to confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord. It's not what the early

Christians believed No, it may not be but it is what God believes. Okay, but then

When the people in let's say let's say the same. Let's say Ignatius of Antioch who is a disciple of John is

God's word wrong We're in this I'm telling you that the oral tradition is also

God's Word and that's what you reject So that's the fundamental We go to the scripture you go to the church fathers you see the lens

Here's the thing he's not even only the church fathers he's just going to oral tradition Looking this up because he can't give us what the oral tradition.

Oh, let me give you let me give you an example Do you know who st. Ignatius of Antioch is? He's he's the disciple of st.

John the Apostle. He headed one of the biggest early Christian communities Which is Antioch fired and this is what he said.

He said fired Yes, it is. Well, it's it's the

Word of God, of course. It's part of the oral tradition and And and how and at the time that he said this who recognized that All the people who looked up to him for guidance

Can you support that I mean Tradition has been something that has

Loop you every you know, it's not a circular. This is common misunderstanding. Okay, so I want you to prove

That the oral tradition is God's Word and you just told me you do it by tradition

That is the very definition of a circular argument. It precedes the Bible.

I already already told you this the oral traditions You're not

God you telling me it doesn't make it true Okay But if you're an apostle it would make it true wouldn't it and that's what was happening is the

Apostles were spreading the word God Jesus oh, right an apostle. What's that?

Are you an apostle? But I'm accepting the tradition that the

Apostles And you're not how do you know the tradition is true

Since it comes before the Bible. How do you know that tradition? And by the way, remember

I told you the Jewish people wrote down the oral law and it's called the Mishnah Why don't you study that why is that not your authority then looks it's not in the

Bible. Oh So it has to be in the Bible Well, yeah

Tradition or just some of the oral tradition whatever Christians have accepted for the past 2 ,000 years is what

I'll accept But for whatever you just said two different there exactly different thing.

Well, let me ask you this Why don't why don't you guys look at the early the writings of the early Christians and and and and think to yourself?

Wow, if this is what Christians have been practicing for the past 2 ,000 years is what I've been practicing

Can you can what I've been practicing even consider religion can I can be considered Christianity?

It's quite interesting There's a new religion Because I can show that what I believe is been practiced by the

Christian Church from the very beginning You can't you haven't you haven't you haven't quoted a single early

Christian writer besides besides the authors know You it is to quote an early

Christian writer Which which version of the early church writers? Do you want me to do the

Catholic version? Like I said, they're all unity in belief It's the heart of the Christian of Christianity is unity of belief

But you guys and Protestants have this unity you guys you guys all come to different conclusions. Okay, here's the thing

I'm gonna ask again, which version of the early Church Fathers the edited version of the

Catholic Church or the original Which one should I which one should I read? I just I need to know because if you say

I have to look it up I need to know which version you're making this claim of edited versions and whatnot. You're gonna

Father would you like a church father? Yeah, you believe Augustine's a church father, right?

St. Augustine. Yeah. Um, I don't remember if he's a church father or not, but he's certainly an authority in the church

Okay authority of the church. Okay, he says Regarding grace what merit then does a man have before grace by which he might receive grace when our every good merit is produced in Us only by grace and when upon being crowned we receive nothing other other than the fruits of his own gifts

Grace alone not works. I don't think that contradicts the church's teachings

So so you wait so you believe that there's no works required for regeneration

Okay, but we're talking about just believing in God right the conversion from not being a Christian to being a

Christian, right That's what I mean for generation What does it take to go from being a not a Christian to a

Christian you have to receive the gospel one and Of course that would require probably being like a good person because people are predisposed to receive the gospel, right?

So what does it mean to be a good person? Does that mean doing good works? It would mean living according to the moral law that's written on your on your heart.

Can you do that? Of course Really? Yeah, there's everyone Okay, so we're not

Christians than psychopaths who don't who aren't ingrained with some sense of morality

I'm just kind of puzzled because scripture says that all has sinned and fall short of the glory of God So if all if all people fall short of the glory of God, who are these?

Not everyone's committing murder and adultery and Jesus says also love the Lord your God with all your heart mind soul and strength

Can you do that? prior to being a Christian No Can you do it after being a

Christian, yeah Well, how can someone who's who doesn't even believe in Jesus Christ as you sin?

Do you sin? Everybody sins, of course, but to varying degrees. I don't commit murder and rape

Then why why are you talking about this making this whole argument about? Being a good person that we can we could be without sin and be a good so you can be without sin

He just Yeah, he just asked you that are you listening?

He just asked you that exact question and you said that after Christ You could be without sin.

He just asked you that. Yes. Let me let me let me Qualify that statement.

You can be without mortal sin Okay, there's two different the Bible teaches that there's sins that lead you to hell and sins that lead you know

There's no you're not gonna find the word mortal sin in there anywhere Okay, let me ask you do you believe there's a point now that you profess to be a

Christian Julie There's a point where you don't sin I it depends on the sin you can commit venial sins and everyone will because everyone falls short but there's there's plenty of people throughout history who've overcome themselves and haven't committed mortal sins like masturbation or watching pornography or all the other common mortal sins that we see today, but of course, there's there's everyone has a sort of distorted will because of her fall on nature, but It's really there's a point where you cannot sin after you what

Anything No But you can still go to heaven if you commit venial sins

Can we go directly to heaven or do we have to go to purgatory first There are plenty of people like Saints who have gone directly to heaven

So so you believe only Saints can go directly to heaven only there are certain people who?

The price here on earth Why are we why would we be in purgatory?

What what is the purpose of purgatory? Well one it's completely substantiated by the

Bible in case you're unaware. Okay Stop with that because it's not substantiated anywhere

Answer the question Answer the question. What do people go to purgatory for just answer the question

It'd be really appreciate things that have been forgiven for mortal sins that have been forgiven But that that still require punishment

Okay So you're saying that there's sins that have not been paid for and they have to be paid for is that what you're saying?

Yes in a way Okay, what do you mean in a way? well, because I I don't trust that you're gonna

I don't trust the line of reasoning that you're about to employ. So I'm just I'm just gonna read scripture if that's okay.

It's already read Okay, and we're gonna wrap up because I got some questions, okay, yeah,

I wanna I'm gonna I'm gonna pray for you tonight Sebastian No, I'm afraid you turn to Christ I'll pray that you accept

Christ. I'm already a born -again believer, but I'm gonna pray that you turn to Christ. So for you

Thanks Alex for coming in. Okay. Yeah. I'll see you next time. So Sebastian We read this earlier

Colossians chapter 2 verse 13 and 14 when it said all the sins were forgiven

Having canceled out the certificate of debt. Do you know when that happened? was

Well, the rest of the verse says having nailed it to the cross So the fact that you say there's a purgatory where people have to pay to work off sins

To get to heaven is evidence that there's a works salvation Purgatory is about working off sin

And yet the Bible says all of the sin was paid at the cross There is no working off sin

The reason we can't do anything to do any works is because Christ did all the work at the cross

That's all that there's nothing left to do Christ did it all but that's not what the

Bible says. Can I read a verse quickly? Sure, but one Corinthians 3 11 15

I may have even said this one last time Says for other foundation can no man lay than that is laid which is

Jesus Christ Now any man build up upon this foundation gold silver precious stones wood a stubble

Every man's work shall be made manifest for the day shall declare it because it shall be revealed by fire

And the fire shall try every man's work of what sort it is if any man's work abide

Which he hath built thereupon he shall receive a reward if any man's work shall be burned

He shall suffer loss, but he himself shall be saved yet. So as by fire

Okay, so now purgatory and that's that's the biblical evidence That is reasonable to come to my conclusion with that with that with that biblical evidence combined

It's it's been believed by Christians for a very long time Let me again we're gonna get back to the see because what you're doing is you're you're abusing scripture

You're taking so it has nothing to do with the topic. You're talking about a final judgment and And it's when purgatory is just yeah.

Okay. How about you? Listen, you haven't done that throughout this entire show I want you to listen

We're talking regeneration Not what happens at the at the final judgment

So the fact is all the sins have already been paid for This is not talking about With the passage you're giving in Corinthians has nothing to do with regeneration

It has nothing to do with the work of of the way you're describing it It does it is there are rewards that we get in heaven

Okay But the thing is is that this is not saying you have to earn it or work it off in any way

Why because collection says that all of the transgressions were paid

That's why see the thing is is that you're contradicting the scripture and you don't even notice it and you keep saying

Oh, we got to bring it all together because tradition answers. Let me tell you son Sebastian There is is no false religion that doesn't have a way of Reconciling its system.

Okay, Jehovah Witnesses will find a way to answer they can say that Oh Christ is gonna return in 1975 and when he doesn't they go.

Oh he returned in the clouds It's no different. Every man -made religion does that? Okay.

Let me get to the questions that people were asking throughout the show. So D asked does your does the guest hold?

To the things taught in the Catholic catechisms of the church the answer to that D is no We did deal with that last week or last time.

He was on because that would have been pop pop Pope John Paul the second And yeah, and he's the one that did that catechism so he would not accept it now.

Did I misrepresent you in that? It would depend on the catechism the Current catechism promulgated by John Paul a second.

I wouldn't well, that's it. Yeah. Did I misrepresent you? No, no, you know why

I actually listened to you Something you haven't done Tom asks, so what is your view of justification by grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone?

Well, it's pretty much what we've been talking about But obviously justification by faith alone is a false doctrine.

No one's ever believed that It came about after Martin Luther Because Martin Luther was a horrible sinner and he himself said that man

Stop stop with all the nonsense, okay You're sitting on right now.

It's nonsense. We're not talking anything about Martin Luther Why is everything like so controlled with you,

I don't understand because All off on your red herrings and not answering

So fine, so you do you believe what Paul wrote in Ephesians 2 9 and 10 or 8 9

Can you read it out for me, please or by grace? You have been saved through faith and that not of yourselves

It is a gift of God not a result of works that no one may boast. Is it true?

How about you is it true what Paul says that you are saved I just said

I agree alone, right? Yes You you whatever you said there is true grace

The very doctor is heretical from from Martin Luther. You believe that now that what?

You see you that's the thing, you know I just told you that whatever Paul said there was true and then and then you you believe in in in justification by grace

Not I don't believe in just to keep justification by grace alone or so Maybe I'm getting things confused.

It is it is What is added grace? What is added to grace if it's not grace alone?

What is what is God's grace alone? Misunderstood and this I misunderstood the question

I was conflating grace alone with faith alone, but you can't conflate you

By grace, I guess okay is only through God's you just said was heretical from Martin Luther.

Okay So you believe that it is so you believe it's grace alone.

It is grace alone. I was conflating grace and Justification by faith alone argument is it is it alone?

What's that? Is it faith alone? It is not faith alone. What do you have to add to faith?

You you will really you have to define what faith is because that's that's the people in the box people say that will faith in the

Bible is just some sort of trust or some Hope but it's really not faith.

Actually, that's the very word That's the very definition of the word faith is trust But to have the faith means that you obey

Christ and his command what the word means you're adding to the word No, that's that's what the

Bible teaches the word faith means the actual

Greek word here means trust commitment That's what it means right and what does it mean to have those things?

Well, you if you have that then you obey Christ. So no, no, no, look, I'm not adding that's that's that's not adding

That's what it is. You just said it doesn't mean trust. That is the exact meaning of the word

That's what the word actually means pistos means trust Yeah, that's the definition of it.

But that's not what it encompasses. That's not what it That is no see this is the thing this is where you're adding to what the

Bible says What the Bible says is through faith pistos trust.

That's what it says Yes, and what would it what it would it look like for someone to have trust in Jesus Christ?

Okay, you see how you go on the red herring we're gonna I'm gonna ask not a red herring This is a legitimate question. What would it look like for someone to have trust trust in Christ?

Well, you'd think that it would mean that you obeyed Christ, right? That's that's probably what it would mean to obey

That's not what this is saying. Why well according to you, but that's not According to look

I will read it again for by grace. You have been saved through faith and that not of yourself

Why do you add And it doesn't contradict what I'm saying it does because you're saying okay, so what is faith to describe faith

To have to have faith what on top of because you trust in God You are going to obey him.

That's what it means. So I'm gonna I'm gonna obey him Correct. You were Part of you're going to obey him is not of yourself

Can you rephrase that please The scripture says and not of yourself.

How do you obey him but not of yourself? because it takes

Everything is given by God. That's why every everything God can harden your heart or soften your heart but ultimately you have to work with your own free will and and cooperate with Whatever grace

God is giving you you cooperate with God Yeah, it's a cooperation with what part of how is how is your cooperation with God not of yourself?

Well the grace what does not of yourself mean the grace that's given to you through this corrupt through this cooperation

Is is from God What does not of Yourself mean does it mean you do something?

Or does it mean you don't do something I think you're just miss miss miss reading that I'm I'm not misreading.

I'm reading it You're the one adding things in and you don't even notice it. I'm I have

I have a holistic view of the Bible. I understand the gospel message But if you had a right view of the

Bible, you wouldn't have to read something into the Bible It doesn't say to get your holistic view.

That's the point. That's You basically decide for yourself what you get to know

Okay, what I've been doing is giving you the meaning of the actual words

You told me faith doesn't mean trust, but that's the actual definition of the word You're telling me that when it says not of yourself.

It actually means of yourself Yeah Definition, but I'm telling you what it would actually mean for you to have faith

You would what you're telling me is What your tradition tells you it should mean.

Mm -hmm, and I'm just telling you what the Bible shows. What what does the if you If you were telling me what the

Bible says Then you wouldn't have to to tell me that this verse means something than what it says

This verse very clearly says that you're saved by grace listen the level of the level the level of The way you approach scripture is something that was never even done for the first like I said, this is why

I said earlier Scripture is the way that people Completely foreign to Christianity no one was doing that for the first no one was

Words and using the words the way they're supposed to be that with their definitions Is that looking like with the magnifying glass and everything the gospel message is is a broad thing

It's supposed to be received in its entirety It's not supposed to be like this lawyer thing that you're doing

Well, yeah, you mean like defining words by their actual definition that that thing

Okay. Yeah faith and trust our trust literally is the definition of faith. What does it mean?

How is that expressed in real life? Well, what does it look like? This it's expressed not of yourself.

That's how it's expressed not of yourself. It's a gift of God So what does not of yourself mean? Does it mean you add something?

Or does it mean you don't add something it's very let's let's look at it Let's look at other examples.

And by the way, this has nothing to do with our debate topic So so the the point of this is is it shows no we we already answered the debate topic

You clearly admitted you were wrong. No, I didn't I've been waiting to respond but every every time

I would get respond you guys throw me off onto a tangent I'm the one throwing. Okay, so I'll start it.

I'll ask it again is Genesis part of Scripture. Yes, okay

Did the Roman Catholic Church exist when Genesis was here? We go again

Can I just respect I talk now like do you have to do all my responses have to be filtered through your lawyer your

Like quite your lawyer questions, or can I just give you what I think well Well, I don't truthfully that the simple reality is we the question is did we need the

Roman Catholic Church? To give us the Bible, right Of course we did.

That's what happened. So that's what happened The Roman Catholic Church did in fact give us the Bible as a fact Roman Catholic Church gave us the book of Genesis, correct

They canonized it as part of the Bible. So so how explain to me because I'm really confused

How did they do that before they existed? Well, you just said The the Jews took out seven books.

They're not they're not the Catholic Roman Catholic Church Okay, but you're using them as an authority you're saying oh the

Jews the rabbis in 78 Books, this is why we go on the tangents. I'm asking you a very simple question

You admitted that you agree that Genesis was recognized as Scripture before there was a

Catholic Church Therefore the only possible conclusion is the Catholic Church wasn't needed to give us the book of Genesis People knew it was

Scripture before the Roman Catholic Church existed There's it is not possible to have

Something that doesn't exist be required to give us something that does exist.

It's just a logical impossibility and the reason I'm sticking with Genesis is because of the fact that it it exposes the failure of your entire argument and I know you keep wanting to go to oh, well, we got the

New Testament We got it. You're you're doing that because you cannot stick with your argument working for Genesis See the only book of the

Bible that I've wanted to talk about all night was Genesis and how many times did you have to go somewhere else you had to go there because You you can only argue from your tradition that didn't exist in the time of Genesis Yeah, obviously

Genesis was always regarded as Inspired during the early

Christian times and that's because the converts or the first 10 ,000 converts to Christianity were all

Jews. They were they were Jews of the Old Testament. Did they both did they accept it as Scripture before? Jesus Christ walked the earth

Yeah Okay, there was an old there was an Old Testament Bible that was regarded as Scripture Okay, so it was recognized as Scripture before the

Roman Catholic Church existed, correct? Yes, those books were okay So the

Roman Catholic Church was not necessary to give us the Bible was it? Not the

Old Testament books. Thank you. I'm talking about the Old Testament books. We're talking about the

Bible and that We're talking about the Bible which includes the New Testament and Old Testament books

So here's the thing your your argument is that that we needed the church to be the authority to give us the

New Testament Correct. Yeah, and yet they weren't needed to give us the authority of the

Old Testament So why are they needed for the New Testament when they weren't needed for the Old Testament? I think they probably

I mean the fact that you had a council of bishops Pronouncing upon an authority of Old Testament books probably reaffirmed the fact that those books were still authoritative

Okay, so it was it wasn't like it was completely unnecessary. It still provided an authoritative role that people who the people who the

Christian the followers of these bishops and of the Catholic Church at that time of the church the only one true church were were just reaffirmed in their faith

In the Old Testament books Are you making this up as you go along No, I'm just saying that's probably what happened

It probably maybe you see So this is a

Is what it is in every every system has it this is the reason I'm going to Genesis and I'm sticking with Genesis because Every every book of the

Old Testament was before the Roman Catholic Church. It was recognized as Scripture We didn't need a

Catholic Church to recognize it in Scripture So if we don't need the Roman Catholic Church to recognize

Scripture for the Old Testament, we don't need it for the New Testament Okay, so then why do you why don't you have seven?

Why don't you have seven books of the Old Testament in your Bible because they were never accepted as they were

That is your tradition it was quote it's quoted and in the New Testament over so Okay, and so are

Cretans and yet you don't accept their works as Scripture They were quoted

Paul quoted a Cretan Yeah Were those books ever regarded as Scripture ever by anyone?

They were quoted. That was your argument. I'm just where they regarded as Scripture the books that that were quoted

In the Septuagint were indeed regarded as Scripture of the Old Testament Not not at the time.

They were quoted by Jesus and the Apostles over 300 So it was a

Cretan 300 times So The you see this is the thing.

I'm using your argument and then you don't like it and And that's the thing. So I really just because they were quoted doesn't necessarily mean that they were

All Why it doesn't matter that if the New Testament was to quote the

Septuagint even if he if they did quote Which I don't think they did but maybe you could find one where they did quote the the

Apocrypha But you just admit it. It doesn't matter. Okay, well then it doesn't matter because then

You still get right that we don't need the Catholic Church to give us the

Bible Okay, but these books were also included in public worship for the first 1 ,500 years

And then and then you stated that they were removed they were added in 1 ,500 years later when they weren't they were that's when they were canonized.

Yes Okay, but they were always recognized as Scripture just because something's this is this is the problem with because you don't understand

Catholicism fully is that dogmas are things that are that have that have already been practiced, but they're not codified

Okay, they're not just making up random rules at these dog at these councils They're codifying things that were already being when we speak about the canon.

That is the codification That's the whole point of it. That's the that's the thing. You can't even get so when

I say that it was canonized in 1500 You're agreeing with me because that is the very definition.

I don't know if that's true either. Let me look that up really quick so We've gone long

I'm gonna I want to see how many see how many of these questions we might be able to get to Okay, well then you'll disagree canonized at the councils of Hippo Carthage and then in response to the

Protestant Reformation reaffirmed Reaffirmed at the deuterocanonical books.

So these were books that were already it was probably in response Reaffirmed those books at Nicaea were they affirmed in Nicaea?

No books were no I don't think any books were canonized that and I see that's what Nicaea was about to discuss the purpose of it was discussed

Which books were the canon? I don't think they actually codified anything there. They didn't officially canonize anything. The books you bring up were not were decided that we were not scripture so the earlier

Council disagrees with you Okay. Well, there were other lists, you know, the Muratorian list you keep going

Oh, what what about the you know, the earlier the early church earlier church? Well, the early church agrees with me and not you know, what doesn't there were other books that were considered canon

Are you aware of like all these other books that have to be rejected at these three councils. I have them here

I read them. Yeah, they were considered to be scripture before the official

Dogmatic declaration at these three councils, which wasn't the Council of Nicaea is the Council of Rome Hippo and Carthage Yeah, and 383 390 382 393 and 397 respectively

And and Nicaea was earlier than that at at what 324 was canonized there

Didn't canonize Well, I guess I guess you're just playing games with the word canonized because they the whole purpose

What was was the purpose of that council? Council of Nicaea. I don't think it was only about the

Bible. No, but that was the reason that they met So so you're saying they get together to discuss what books are in the

Bible, but they never talked about what books are in the Bible Okay, what I'm saying? I'm saying that they didn't officially canonize it

Well, and see that's the whole thing where you play games with your words you go, oh they didn't Yourself earlier that oh they were

You have a council they reject these books and you say well they didn't officially do it

But that's the purpose of the council and so you're only taking in the things you want And that's the whole thing.

You can't even be honest with your own with with history But I I'm not we're not gonna be able to get to all the questions.

I'll ask a chat GPT When were the books of the Bible canonized? about that since you

Earlier, I didn't someone else did ask it ask you what?

What is uh? This is by the 4th century. Most Christian communities accepted a core set of books however, the councils of Hippo 393 and Carthage 397 confirmed the canon of 27

New Testament books, which was later ratified by the Council of Trent in 1546 for the

Catholic Church later ratified So That means exactly what

I said That you're you're you're ratified books came in the 15th century or 16th century

Yeah, but in those in those three councils in the 4th century In other words chat GPT is agreeing with me is what it's not because it's saying that those seven books

Which you've removed were already a part of the canon in those three in those three original councils. So They weren't removed because they were never headed

They were they were always considered part of sacred scripture agrees with you

It's it's sad it really is folks we're gonna call it a night Pray pray for Sebastian.

He clearly is blinded by his tradition next week what we'll be doing is

We are I mean you you read it you put it in chat GPT and then it gives you the answer And I told me those seven books were included which you've removed.

So what are you even arguing here? You mean the books that it ratified in the 1500s doesn't matter.

They were still they were still considered sacred scripture See, that's no point when When the facts hit you in the face you go doesn't matter

Like it doesn't matter. Okay. Well, then that's not even know what it means by ratified But it clearly stated that they were considered sacred scripture and you're saying that those books weren't considered sacred scripture

By by lieu of the fact that Read it again read it again and see what it said.

Yeah you It says ratified, but I don't even know what that means So I'll say that you think if you don't know what it means

You shouldn't be making the argument that it doesn't say what it says because you don't know what it means

Because it clearly states that they were canonized it says 393 the first formal council to list the 27 books the

New Testament and the deuterocanonical books of the Old Testament as canonical That's what it says about the

Council of Hippo and 393 ad This included the seven books in question and then it refers to other books

So they're not they weren't canonized at Hippo They were the 27 books and there were the other books and it's ratified

Ratified means it was revisited. It's edited. It was updated So they were added officially

That's what the word means it says the first formal council to list the 27 books of the

New Testament and the Deuterocanonical books of the Old Testament as canonical was the Council of Hippo and 393 ad

So, what is the word ratified mean do you know Well, let me look it up because precise definitions

Assign or give formal consent to making it officially valid Yep.

There you go. And so what does it mean to kind of canonize something? To make it officially valid which that means

I don't know what it's talking about So you don't know what it's talking about. It means that what

I said earlier that it wasn't canonized until the 1500s It says ratified my you just It doesn't use the word canonized

It has the same meaning you just said that okay, so that's what I'm saying

Why would chat GPT say that in 393 those books were canonized and then they were ratified in 1546?

That is canonized right the the 27 books and the Deuterocanonical books, right?

Ratified so so what is ratified mean? Well, you just said it means that basically the same thing is canonized, but no

I let you say that You said that you were the one who said that Folks I asked you

I asked you what it meant and you literally said that So all right, you know, this is the reason that Right on this you

Haven't books that were accepted as sacred scripture by all Christian communities What not at the earlier council they weren't at 393 they were 80 380

I what about nice I keep going. What about an icea? Why weren't they accepted in an icea? I don't think there were any

I don't think that's that's what happened at the council So here's the thing. Here's the thing

You are unfortunately going to spend eternity in a lake of fire because of your tradition

Okay, but I see it was meant to resolve the Aryan crisis. It was right and it was

It and it also was to resolve the issue of the the

Bible's which books Okay, I'm gonna need a fact check on that But as you read from chat

GPT it was ratified in the 1500s But canonized in 393 don't forget that part read the whole thing council of Hippo 393 ad the first formal council to list the 27 books of the

New Testament and the deuterocanonical Books of the Old Testament as canonical Okay, so it's the first one to list it as canonical

Okay, what is ratified mean? Reaffirm Is that what you said for the definition to reaffirm?

That's what it said in one of the definitions is that it reaffirmed Yeah, and yeah, so you're that wasn't the definition you read earlier though It was there were two because I looked it up multiple times, but one said ratified and the other said

Reaffirmed so Reaffirmed to affirm something again So, okay, but but just but I want your why would they hear

Andrew? Is that what I believe isn't unreasonable for you to think that what I'm saying here is not

Absolutely. I absolutely believe that for you to believe that you needed a

Catholic Church That didn't exist to give us a book that did exist is absolutely unreasonable

It exists because the same people who can who canonized all those books believe in a lot of the same things that Catholics We're talking we're talking about before the time of Christ Okay, but that's not what we're talking about though we're talking about Talking about we're talking about the

Old Testament you the the statement is that do we need the Catholic Church to give us?

The Bible yet you admit we had the Bible before the Catholic Church. It wasn't the same Bible Why are you playing word games

Andrew? Because the Genesis was part of the Bible was it not it was?

Was it recognized before there was a Catholic Church Yes, it was able to recognize it without the

Catholic Church, correct? Yeah, the Catholic Church need the Catholic Church to recognize the

Bible before the Old Testament They didn't need So so the whole point is you you have the you have to give the evidence

Where somehow the New Testament and Old Testament suddenly changes that we need the

Catholic Church now To give us the Bible after Christ when we didn't need it before Christ The Catholic Church didn't even exist before Christ, so I don't understand what you're like My okay the

New Testament didn't exist either so fashion I'm gonna end I'm gonna end it with this the reason you don't understand what

I'm saying is because you never took the time to listen Feel like I've been

I've been rehashing the same thing and yet I know you admitted that I didn't misrepresent you Okay So I understand what you're saying

More lawyer talk what you're saying. I disagree with it. You don't even understand what

I'm saying because you're so busy I do I do understand what you're saying, but you're you come on Illogical, that's that's probably why

I'm having a hard time understanding what you're saying because what you're saying is so illogical it isn't You're the one

Listen, I use logic simple logic to very simple logic If the

Catholic Church is needed to give us the Bible then we shouldn't have any Bible before the Catholic Church and yet we do

That's very simple logic the Catholic Church. It wasn't a New Testament There wasn't a

New Testament before the Catholic that's the word game because we didn't say New Testament. Did we we said

Bible? But again, that's the game is you're changing the definition of the Bible Ask any

Christian anyone ask any person who identifies as a Christian What does the Bible consist of and maybe they'll say 66 or 73 books

But they'll most certainly say it comes it consists of both the New and Old Testament Genesis part of the

Bible is that Bible is it part of Scripture now? Is it Scripture?

Yes, or no. Yes, it is. And did the Catholic Church tell us it was Scripture it did

So no one Was no one knew it was Scripture until the Catholic Church it was considered

Scripture already Already, so we didn't need the Catholic Church. They already knew it

That's very firm. The Catholic Church reaffirmed the Old Testament. Doesn't matter. We didn't get a

Catholic Church to tell us Are we talking about the Old Testament books here because it shows the fealty of your argument with simple logic

That's why it doesn't we're not talking about All right, the New Testament didn't exist before Christ, so And we're talking about the

Bible we're referring to what Scripture is and The Genesis is the Bible.

The Old Testament is Bible here playing with definitions like even Rob saying Is part of the

Bible But so is the New Testament. So why do you keep on disregarding the

New Testament? I'm not disregarding anything It's you are disregarding it because Why do you want to reject the

Old Testament I Accept the Old Testament as part of you sacred scripture as well as the

New Testament But you keep on insisting that the Bible only is the Old Testament. I never said that once never once That's what you are saying your line of reasoning

It's absolutely not what I'm saying That's that is what you are saying. That's that's why you have to say is the new is it was 5 ,000 years ago one ever promised you're gone.

You're gonna you're gonna tell me I'm lying then you're gone. All right It's been three hours

You've refuted your own argument because Genesis is part of the

Bible Genesis was recognized as Bible without a Catholic Church and so the simple reality is

That we didn't need the Catholic Church to give us any of the books of the

Old Testament There's no reason we needed a Catholic Church to give us any of the books of the

New Testament because God already established how we can know what scripture is because he spoke it and At the time of its writing people knew it was scripture

That is how we knew because God made it known We didn't need a

Catholic Church through all of the years of the Old Testament was written 1 ,500 years we didn't need a

Catholic Church. Tell us what scripture was there's no reason we need it for the new and His tradition is based on the fact that he needs that because the tradition is not in the

Bible It is in his church. And that is what he is Unfortunately as I started saying is going to unfortunately go and spend a lake in the lake of fire for all of eternity

And I don't want that for him. So folks, please be praying for Sebastian You see how his tradition blinds him to two meanings of words to You know simple logic to save his tradition.

He can't accept what the scripture clearly says Next week as I started to say Kevin Yance will be on We will be going back and looking at the church there in Iowa That we had give that we said we'd give an update on so we will talk about one more episode on the dangerous doctrines

So that will be for next week And with that just remind you to strive to make today an eternal day for the glory of God and we'll see you next time