Same Anti Catholic User in many YouTube videos

  • Thread starter Thread starter DictatorCzar
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
kainosktisis said:
Church of Christ
Click to expand...
Many non-denominational/independent congregations use that name. They may or may not be associated with one another. There was a quasi-denomination called the Churches of Christ that split off from the Disciples of Christ (itself part of the Stone-Campbell movement) but many congregations use the name “Church of Christ” without having any ties whatsoever to that split. It’s a lot like “Bible Church.” There are plenty of churches with “Bible Church” in the name but it doesn’t imply an association.
 
DictatorCzar said:
Wow, he just said most church father documents are forgeries. He also said most Catholic Doctrines are not In the Bible. He said Jesus don’t quote from 7 books of the apocrypha.

He said, “wonder why Catholics love to use fallible writings as doctrines.

O ya, bcos RCC doctrines can’t be proven from the BIBLE.
That’s why!!

Tsk tsk…”

That’s just annoying other Catholics across YouTube. Well, apparently there’s one Catholic successfully defending against him, he Justs Repetitious and annoying.
Click to expand...
DicatorCzar i noticed your profile says you are Baptist and this guy you are quoting is obviously not Catholic either and you don’t seem to be in agreement with him. Why? What is it about Catholicism YOU THINK needs to be defended against this guy? If this guy is purporting untruths, whatever they are, why don’t you correct him yourself?

Peace!!!
 
adf417 said:
If this guy is purporting untruths, whatever they are, why don’t you correct him yourself?
Click to expand...
If the Bible.ca guy has been around for more than a decade telling people there’s no such thing as psychiatry, while obsessively trying to prove he is right and the whole world is wrong, I don’t think a dialogue is possible no matter the religion/denomination of the person who tries.
 
Understood, but from the website, it’s not one that’s LDS-affiliated in any way…

It’s a specific denomination/sect to which I refer. That is the name they go by - not a generic church of Christ:

en.wikipedia.org

Churches of Christ - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org

I know someone who’d grown up in this church/sect.
 
Last edited:
kainosktisis said:
Understood, but from the website, it’s not one that’s LDS-affiliated in any way
Click to expand...
I think you may have gotten Stone and Campbell (Restorationists who started the DoC from which the CoC split) mixed with Joseph Smith (LDS, I think).
 
No, actually looking up the name on Google produced various churches all listed as Churches of Christ or Churches of Jesus Christ or other titles added to the names. This church appears Protestant. But it is what it is…

The ones in my area are specifically Church of Christ, & they were listed as contacts from the bible.ca website.
 
He doesn’t sound convincing if all he does is repeat assertions without substance.
 
Last edited:
kainosktisis said:
No, actually looking up the name on Google produced various churches all listed as Churches of Christ or Churches of Jesus Christ or other titles added to the names. This church appears Protestant. But it is what it is
Click to expand...
Sorry if I didn’t come across clearly in the last two posts. What I mean is that a church labeled as CoC or CoJC:
  • May or may not be part of the denomination called “Churches of Christ” that you linked to (and probably is not)
  • May or may not be affiliated with the Bible.ca owner/organization (and almost certainly is not)
About that second point… in view of the basically pathological views of Bible.ca towards mental health, I seriously doubt many or most of the churches added to the directory have any affiliation with Bible.ca. It is much more likely that the Bible.ca owner googled for churches with “Church of Christ” in the name and added them to the directory without their consent or knowledge.

In other words, your friend’s church probably has zero to do with Bible.ca.
 
Last edited:
MarysLurker said:
40.png
adf417:
If this guy is purporting untruths, whatever they are, why don’t you correct him yourself?
Click to expand...
If the Bible.ca guy has been around for more than a decade telling people there’s no such thing as psychiatry, while obsessively trying to prove he is right and the whole world is wrong, I don’t think a dialogue is possible no matter the religion/denomination of the person who tries.
Click to expand...
:+1:t3:
You don’t have to explain it to me.

Peace!!!
 
It is God who gives the gift of faith. Just get out of this forum and use the questions and answers in Catholic.com, check out Patrick Madrid on Relevant Radio or on the web. Get into Scott Hahn…and do yourself a favor and us… I have no interest in looking up that link and I hope no one catches the bait and heads to that link either. Praying for you and that you get the gift of faith. The bible came from the church Christ started and not from the man you find amazing. God bless your search and if you take the first step of seriously speaking to a priest at a Roman Catholic church…we will rejoice in your journey.
 
Last edited:
I looked up more of bible.ca

They believe in the Septuagint rather than the masoretic??? So they believe in the septuagint chronology of genesis. They said the masoretic was corrupted by Jews in around 160AD. They said the Septuagint only included the Tanakh. They said the so called,”apocrypha” was made after the Septuagint was completed, well some. They said the Septuagint was being created in around 282BC and it was completed In around 150 BC. I thought the Septuagint included the 7 books and even more(3rd and 4th Maccabees And some others).
 
DictatorCzar said:
They said the so called,”apocrypha” was made after the Septuagint was completed, well some.
Click to expand...
Then he can’t explain why the Dead Sea Scrolls have at least 2 deuterocanonicals: Wisdom and Tobit.
The Dead Sea Scrolls - Scrolls Content

I think you have more than enough information just from this discussion to conclude that this YouTube person is seriously misinformed, deliberately lying, or even mentally ill. It’s time to stop listening to him and start doing your own research… and most of all, praying for the Holy Spirit to guide you.
 
DictatorCzar said:
I thought the Septuagint included the 7 books and even more(3rd and 4th Maccabees And some others).
Click to expand...
You are correct. Speaking of doing your own research, here is the oldest copy of the Septuagint that we have. All the deuterocanonical “apocrypha” books are there, so you can see for yourself:

http://codexsinaiticus.org/en/

Now, here is something. Use the top navigation to go to Acts 9:31. In the Greek, find this text, which means “throughout”:

καθ οληϲ

Now go to this Greek pronunciation guide:

https://www.foundalis.com/lan/grkalpha.htm

So that’s the name that the Apostles actually used to refer to the church throughout the world. Say it… or just guess what it is…
 
Kata Holos?? I didn’t think that would be in the Bible. I heard in early church documents, not in biblical scripture. Wow. That just turned everything around!!! I had a hard time finding some of the letters. In that last letter of holos, there’s either a tail or no tail and I didn’t no, but I just looked it up. Kata holos!!! I looked back at Codex sinaiticus. Wow. My mind is blown. The term Catholic really is in the Bible. Is that only for that Codex???
 
I can clearly see kataholos in Koine Greek scriptures, but what about modern Greek? I can’t tell, because it changed. What is the modern Greek version?
 
Last edited:
Hmm, this website disagrees.

www.google.com

Is the Name Catholic Apostolic Roman Church Biblical?

Having knowledge in names is inevitable especially in our time. In traveling, it is important to know the name of our destination, otherwise, we may probably lose our way. Also, we must not call a …
www.google.com www.google.com

I skimmed through pretty quickly. It only talks about Acts 9:31 and kataholos. It doesn’t talk about Ignatius of Antioch though. This is anti Catholic. It says that it doesn’t describe the Catholic Church. You can have skim through. This guy, not the website because different groups make their stuff. This guy or gal said the term church of god is more accurate and in the Bible. Catholic is not, this person said kataholos is not translated as Catholic. I’m like what?? Makes no sense because of Ignatius of Antioch and 4 other church fathers who said Catholics church, right? Those church fathers said kataholos.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top