Matteo

@JondTrill @TheStaad It sounds like you are intensely holier than thou.

@TheStaad The hypocrisy in a Catholic saying you’re prideful, LMAO coming from the Holier than thou group, dude you and your Pope act like you have ownership of God and have fo centuries told people lies to enrich and control, and you set up a system and said we so great we are infallible

Evangelicals are some of the most brainwashed, irrational and prideful people I have ever encountered They are driven by emotion instead of logic. They bow to the cult of personality and opinions of their “pastors” rather than the person of Christ and the Church that He founded and upon which He conferred His authority They deny the New Covenant along with the teachings of Christ on marriage, divorce and the Eucharist They believe you are “saved” simply by saying a short prayer, regardless of how you live your life You can’t be a Christian and believe these things Evangelicalism is nothing more than a large cult that embraces the heresy of Zionism and denies the authority of Jesus. It’s Talmudic “Judaism” in disguise

I’ve heard people say the inner witness of the Spirit tells true believers it’s God’s word (the same idea Mormons use for the Book of Mormon). When I hear this I always ask, “Do you remember where you were and what you were doing each of the 66 times the Holy Spirit confirmed the inspiration of each. Bible book to you?” They think it’s a weird question. I think it’s a natural question. I sometimes follow with “Did you accept some books as Scripture even before you read them so the Holy Spirit could tell you personally that it was inspired?” I find that most people absolutely hate this question but it is a perfectly sensible question to ask anyone who claims “each Christian who is really saved and has God’s Spirit will know for themselves what Scripture is.”

@Rblv73 Danny, I worship My highest authority Jesus Christ, who comes to me via Church, Sacrament, and 73 book Bible, as well as intense personal relationship on a minute by minute basis. The Bible ain't my highest authority. No apologies. And no sale on your tired schtick.

Because the premise is illogical- unless you possess a talking Bible

@tmontanarealty @BillArnoldTeach That argument doesn't work on them. In their Jack Chick theology-with-crayons universe, God side-chucked the Bible through a crowd of wicked priests who were trying to intercept it. I am not joking.

@BillArnoldTeach Protestants who hate Catholics literally worship a book they Catholics wrote. x.com/i/status/20476…

Christ didn’t write a book. He built a Church. Guess which one Protestants reject.

@honorablesaint @Gadget440 I've got to wonder how many people just want to hate on someone, and, look at that: virulent anti-Catholicism! I'll join that!

@Gadget440 Many people will turn to religion and use it to manipulate and cover themselves. A tale as old as time. It’s a tool for them. It is for them. It’s not about humbling themselves before God. It’s their way to use God to their worldly benefit.

During his interview with Piers Morgan, Russell Brand got increasingly defensive and didn't want to answer any questions. Here are the final moments when he melted down:

@ByGraceAL0NE @alfray7 @Burgess7281975 I'm going with Abrahamic faith that when He said "is" at the Last Supper, He meant it. Why do you think that faith in Him less than this is going to get the job done for you?

He says in the same exact dialogue that you must COME and BELIEVE to have eternal life. So which is it? Come and believe? Or eat and drink His flesh? Since so many other scriptures literally say that one must only believe/have faith to have eternal life I’m going with FAITH. And eating and drinking Christ is symbolic of RECEIVING Him by Faith. Pretty clear actually.

Because Holy Mother Church and Her Scripture are quite clear that we will be judged according to our works. Romans 2:6 “render to every man according to his works.” Jeremiah 17:10 “Giving to all according to their ways, according to the fruit of their deeds.” Matthew 16:27 “He will repay every man for what he has done.” 2 Corinthians 5:10 “receive good or evil according to what he has done.” 1 Peter 1:17 “Now if you invoke as Father him who judges impartially according to each one’s works, conduct yourselves with reverence during the time of your sojourning,” Apocalypse of Saint John 20:12 “I saw the dead, the great and the lowly, standing before the throne, and scrolls were opened. Then another scroll was opened, the book of life.[j]The dead were judged according to their deeds,” Apocalypse of Saint John 22:11-15 “Let the wicked still act wickedly, and the filthy still be filthy. The righteous must still do right, and the holy still be holy. Behold, I am coming soon. I bring with me the recompense I will give to each according to his deeds. I am the Alpha and the Omega, the first and the last, the beginning and the end.” Blessed are they who wash their robes so as to have the right to the tree of life and enter the city through its gates. Outside are the dogs, the sorcerers, the unchaste, the murderers, the idol-worshipers, and all who love and practice deceit.” Matthew 12:36 “I tell you, on the day of judgment people will render an account for every careless word they speak.” Matthew 7:21 ““Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven,[j] but only the one who does the will of my Father in heaven.” #CatholicX #CatholicTwitter

@5Solas2 Look in the mirror, anti-Catholic.

Every anti-Calvinist.

@Life_truthway Go ahead and run with that. What could possibly go wrong?

Yes or No ?

@BillArnoldTeach @1jon44 They hate you for this and you are doing a stupendous job here. DM me if you feel like it.

@1jon44 John 3:16 says believe James 2 says belief alone isn’t enough Keep reading

“Faith alone” isn’t in Scripture. But judgment by works is. Explain that without ignoring half the Bible.

@CatholicPods @histcatholiques It is the modern world that thinks sex is the most important thing, so condemnation of its improper use is going to loom large.

@histcatholiques There is no "buried question". Catholic Church has never considered sexual sin to be the most grave kind of sin. It has always been taught that, eg, a mortal sin of pride or envy is a worse sin than a mortal sexual sin.

Pope Leo XIV just turnPope Leo XIV just turned the issue of the hierarchy of sin into a major conservation. He quietly reopened one of Catholicism's most buried questions: how did sexual sin come to sit at the top of this moral hierarchy. And here of course history matters 1/10🧵

@KickPistons @EcciusMaximus BTW, great turn of phrase.

@beetle67a @EcciusMaximus It's a topic worthy of study, how so many non-Catholics unhesitatingly view Paul as a fellow-traveller like themselves rather than a divinely appointed chastiser and order-giver to whom they stand in a relationship of casual insubordination.

"IF PAUL COULD SEE THE CHURCH IN AMERICA TODAY...." Based on his writings alone Paul would more than likely condemn the endless fragmentation of the Protestant tradition. He would more than likely single out the evangelical world for their most extreme expressions of private judgment and anti-authority theology using the harshest language aimed at Sola Scriptura. @5SolasMissy He would then write to Rome harshly criticizing Pope Leo XIV for not calling a Crusade to end the Protestant tradition once and for all.

@KickPistons @EcciusMaximus I envy the prots. Nothing but amazing surprises in store.

@KickPistons @EcciusMaximus A year ago or something a prot asked "What would Paul be writing to Christians today?" My answer: "He would tell you heretics to get back into the true Church."

@EcciusMaximus Protestantism is basically a counter-reply by the rebellious Corinthians against Paul after he excoriates them for neglecting Christ in the Eucharist and profaning the sacrament of marriage.

@5Solas2 You depict the Bible Christian worshiping a Bible verse. So good job.

💯

Probably not much further we can take this, but I'm genuinely curious as to your answer to this question. Unpack for me precisely why Simon Peter was blessed in Mt 16:17? This is not a gotcha at all. Preach to me what is going on there. I want to hear where you're coming from and I have no intention of arguing against it.

Just 1 Corinthian 9-12 Galatians, Ephesians again today for the umpteenth time and don’t see anything resembling what the RCC claims except that it speaks as to why we need to stick to the Word and apostles teaching by letter or oral alone. The thing is until I began listening to RC talk about oral tradition it never occurred to me that they weren’t one in the same, which of course they are. No one writes instructions and then teach something else when speaking in person. Oral tradition cannot be confirmed this many years from the witnesses. RC dogma doesn’t have any roots in the Bible. Sorry to disappoint. I’ve been a student of the Bible for 40 years and was shocked when I found out what the RCC taught as dogma. I could never be RC.

🚨‼️Let me make something clear before the Catholic debates start rolling in. I am not coming at Roman Catholicism as someone who watched three YouTube clips and grabbed a handful of anti-Catholic talking points. I grew up around Catholicism. My family is Catholic. I have been around priests. I studied church history in seminary. I studied it through years of personal reading. I have taught my own course on church history, which is available on VerseQuest. And then I went a step further and took Yale University’s course, A Journey through Western Christianity: from Persecuted Faith to Global Religion, which walks through early Christianity, medieval Catholicism, the rise of the papacy, monasticism, crusades, councils, the Reformation, Trent, Catholic Reform, and the Jesuits. So no, I am not afraid of Catholic history. I have studied it from Protestant sources, Catholic sources, academic sources, and even from inside the kind of academic institutions Catholics love to appeal to when they think Bible believers are just ignorant fundamentalists. I went the extra mile because I wanted to understand the system, not misrepresent it. But here is where the debate must stay honest: history can explain how Rome developed, but history cannot make Rome biblical. A council can define a doctrine, but a council cannot turn an unscriptural doctrine into apostolic truth. A tradition can become old, beautiful, emotional, and deeply embedded in religious culture, but age does not equal authority. The question is still, “What saith the scripture?” So I have no problem debating a Catholic who wants to deal honestly with the issue. But I am not debating stained glass, cathedrals, incense, emotional pageantry, or the claim that “we are old, therefore we are right.” Show me Rome in the Bible. Show me purgatory. Show me Mary as mediatrix. Show me prayers to saints. Show me papal supremacy. Show me transubstantiation. Show me the Mass as a repeated sacrifice. Show me where Peter acts like a pope. Show me where the apostles taught the Roman system. I know the history. I have studied the development. I understand the arguments. And after all of that, I am still a King James Bible-believing Christian because the issue is not whether Rome has history. The issue is whether Rome has Scripture.

@NintendoSteve @mattjhedges11 The prots essentially believe that God side-chucked the Bible through a crowd of evil priests trying to intercept it. As for me and my house, I'm going with historical causality and the principle of sufficient reason. Here I stand and I can do no other.

@mattjhedges11 I'm the originator of that flow-chart, and its argument is completely sound. All versions of Sola Scriptura lack a mechanism for authoritatively identifying and promulgating a tradition. So if you identify a ex-biblical tradition which is also a doctrine, there's a problem.

It really doesn’t matter to these types of people if we answer it a thousand times. They’re going to continue to spread it around, hoping that it will convince the ignorant and deceive the simple.

@mattjhedges11 I've never seen a single satisfactory answer as to why I should hold to Bibke Alone.

@MrCasey62 They quite honestly don't know the difference between "word games" and "implications of concepts".

Evangelicals, incapable of understanding big words, invariably default to the anti-Catholic accusation “it’s WORD GAMES!” It’s both an admission that they’re uneducated and a pathetically lazy cop-out.

@realmikolson It absolutely is trying to teach you something. That you won't hear it is not on him.

Low-information, rage-baiting posts like the one below are precisely why it feels impossible to have productive dialogue online. The post below—and just about every other post from this Roman Catholic account (and countless others like it)—is not trying to teach you anything. It’s not trying to inform you with factual information. It’s not trying to sharpen your intellect by providing arguments that make you think. It’s not trying to strengthen your faith in Jesus. It’s simply trying to agitate a neurotic response through purposeful elusiveness, with more holes in the argument than SpongeBob. Profiles like this, often anonymous, are the perfect storm: intellectually vacant while passionately sure of themselves. If you try to engage in dialogue, they’ll run you in circles, repeat themselves, refuse to acknowledge legitimate information if it contradicts their narrative, etc., etc., etc. Many will then turn to profanity and even violent threats if that doesn’t work. My solution at this point? Mass-block every single one of these accounts. Not because you aren’t interested in dialogue with people who disagree with you, but precisely because you are. Ironically, that’s exactly what accounts like this don’t want.