Gaspard de Coligny, Seigneur de Châtillon

@wholemars Audi horrible

U.S. loyalty rates by make, February 2026 1. Tesla — 61.1% 2. Subaru — 60.5% 3. Toyota — 59.9% 4. Ferrari — 59.7% 5. Honda — 58.2% 6. Ford — 57.8% 7. Lucid — 57.9% 8. Chevrolet — 56.7% 9. Nissan — 55.7% 10. Mercedes-Benz — 54.7% 11. BMW — 52.9% 12. Kia — 52.9% 13. Hyundai — 51.7% 14. Lexus — 50.4% 15. Mazda — 48.3% 16. GMC — 47.8% 17. Porsche — 46.7% 18. Rolls-Royce — 46.2% 19. Lincoln — 45.9% 20. Volvo — 44.5% 21. Acura — 44.2% 22. Land Rover — 43.9% 23. Lamborghini — 43.6% 24. Jeep — 43.5% 25. Volkswagen — 43.2% 26. Cadillac — 41.2% 27. Aston Martin — 40.8% 28. Audi — 38.0% 29. Ram — 38.8% 30. Buick — 36.0% 31. Genesis — 36.1% 32. Mitsubishi — 34.3% 33. Polestar — 34.9% 34. Infiniti — 31.5% 35. Bentley — 30.0% 36. Rivian — 28.6% 37. McLaren — 25.0% 38. INEOS — 24.7% 39. Chrysler — 21.4% 40. Alfa Romeo — 20.2% 41. VinFast — 20.5% 42. Lotus — 16.3% 43. Jaguar — 15.8% 44. Dodge — 15.5% 45. Maserati — 11.7% 46. Fiat — 3.3% 47. Mini — 0.0% 48. Smart — 0.0% 49. Fisker — 0.0%

@sola_chad Amen and verily

Thank God for the Reformation

@dvermont @peterpeccavi You deny your history and I weep when I remember the blood you split

@AdmiralColigny @peterpeccavi Protestants have lost all their history. For the record, you understand that we don’t put the same reliance on a traditional story like as we do scripture?

If Peter is the first Pope, why is it that he never “venerates” Mary? I ask because if Rome stands on Peter, then Peter’s silence matters. And if Rome stands on apostolic tradition, then the apostles’ silence matters. Let’s look at Peter first. We don’t need tradition about him. We have his written testimony. Peter’s preaching is recorded in detail in places like Acts 2, 3, and 10. His focus is relentlessly on Christ--His life, death, resurrection, and lordship. Mary is never invoked, addressed, or presented as an object of devotion. Not once. When Mary does appear, like in Acts 1:14, she’s simply counted among the believers praying. She’s not singled out, not exalted, not approached. She’s *in* the Church, not over it. In Peter’s own letters, there is zero Marian language. No appeal to her, no special honor, no hint of intercession. For someone supposedly establishing a pattern of Marian veneration, his silence is deafening. This all lines up with the broader New Testament witness. When a woman in the crowd tries to elevate Jesus’ mother, Christ redirects the blessing to those who hear and obey the Word (Luke 11:27-28). The emphasis consistently moves away from biological proximity toward faith and obedience. Now widen the lens across the apostles as a whole. In their preaching, in their letters, and in their instruction to the churches, there is no instance of Marian veneration as it is later defined in Roman Catholic practice. No invocation. No devotional address. No liturgical pattern. Nothing that even approximates it. That matters, because doctrine doesn’t emerge ex nihlio. It emerges from what is taught, practiced, and handed down within the apostolic witness. And here the pattern is not mixed or ambiguous. It is uniformly Christ focused and entirely silent on Marian veneration. So the question is not whether one can locate a verse that explicitly forbids it. The question is whether there is any positive apostolic pattern that gives it warrant in the first place. And when the entire apostolic record is taken together, the answer is that there is none. So here again is the papist dilemma: If your standard is Peter, then your first pope never practiced it. If your standard is apostolic tradition, then the apostles never transmitted it. Either way, it’s not grounded in the apostolic witness. It’s something that shows up later and then gets read backward into texts that never contained it. Which is error. And that’s the point. Not that silence alone proves falsity, but that the total apostolic pattern gives no positive warrant for it. Marian dogma is none other than idolatrous deception. Repent.

@p3driver @MartinP49146517 @BibleInContext1 The help defeat Protestants argument so even if not scripture Pope needed them

@MartinP49146517 @AdmiralColigny @BibleInContext1 But practically speaking what's the value added -- for example, do they add to the Gospel?

Obvious lies drive people to the Catholic Church. Council of Rome 382AD 73 books Council of Hippo 393AD 73 books Council of Carthage 397AD 73 books Council of Carthage 419AD 73 books Council of Florence 1442AD 73 books Council of Trent 1546AD 73 books Church is the pillar & bulwark of truth (Scripture). Martin Luther changed his view on canonicity after 1,150 years. Protestantism removed the books after over 1,400 years in the 19th century. Disgraceful. Satanic.

When they call you Islamophobes, I want you to remember that 200 years ago, in Chios, 42.000 Greek Christians were massacred by the Muslim Turks and 52.000 were sold into slavery. Please don't forget.

Very good points here. I love and respect many of the early church fathers. But their teachings and writings must always be viewed as below scripture. Not equal with it.

Yes

@mi46565 @5Solas2 Are we sheep that bleat and must be feed right?

You know what IS in the Bible? Jesus' institution of the Eucharist. Many people walked away from Jesus after he said, "Unless you eat of the flesh of the Son of Man, and Drink his blood, you will have no life within you." John 6:53. Jesus DID NOT back-peddle or say "Wait! I didn't really mean it!" He let them walk away. If you truly believe in scripture, then you have to resolve how you will actually accomplish the task in John 6:53 without believing that the God who makes ALL THINGS POSSIBLE would give you an impossible task. God makes John 6:53 come to life every single day in the church he created to carry on until end times, and Jesus said "The gates of Hell will not prevail" against HIS church- The Catholic Church. Whether you choose to believe it, or not.

The reason Roman Catholics hate sola scriptura is because much of their theology cannot be found in it.

@InJeremiah @5Solas2 Unbiblical

@5Solas2 Right…

@MCulhaven51091 @5Solas2 Well said

My experience talking with them confirms this. They start the discussion by mangling the scriptures in a vain attempt to prove Rome's theology, then when that fails they shift to "Show me sola scriptura in the Bible!" with a dash of "You wouldn't even have the Bible if it weren't for Rome." I honestly feel sorry for them (except the really mean ones 🤣).

@5Solas2 Yes yes yes!!

@RussNRoses Compare scripture w scripture like the Bereans. Own goal by you Sir

God picked Mary to birth His Son above anyone else - not you,your mother, or your sister... Hence, she's your spiritual mother in Christ, not your sister in Christ God picked the flesh - not the written word like in the OT to leave the church -, Not your symbols & Bible. God picked the Church father to preach, guide & put together anything in the Bible - not you, Pastor Bob or contradicting Reformers 1600 years later.... God picked one Holy, Apostolic, Catholic Church for the World - Not a million contradictive denomination. Hope this helps !

@IudexDracul @celticwarfare @ksorbs But they say he’s not the son of God and our Lord and Savior! Even the demons believe said the Bible

@celticwarfare @ksorbs Muslims don't denounce Jesus, he's a big deal

This is insane. The historic Église Saint-Cyriaque church in Montenach, France, was just set on fire. Survived both world wars but couldn’t survive diversity.

@celticwarfare @ksorbs Wait the Pope says they worship the same God?

@ksorbs They are attacking Us Catholics in the name of their pedophile prophet.

@robbertleusink And all this at a time when Catholic Church was killing people for having Bibles in their own language btw Diodati Bible 1607 brilliant scholarship in Italiano

In 1604, King James I commissioned a new Bible translation to stop his subjects questioning his authority 47 scholars worked on it for 7 years The King James Bible was published on May 2, 1611 Protestants call it the word of God But it was commissioned by a king to serve a political purpose The Catholic Church preserved scripture for a thousand years before a king decided he wanted his own version Only the Catholic Bible is unaltered and true

@robbertleusink @TimothyMondayBt Saint Jerome removed them from the main part of the Bible that’s why they have the name apocryphal they’re not Cannon

@TimothyMondayBt Deuterocanonical books removed and texts altered

@Catholicizm1 Don’t lie

Reminder: every single person in this photo is Catholic.

@hdpayens Adult baptism - the architecture shows adult baptismal areas

In 348 AD, a bishop in Jerusalem sat down and delivered 24 lectures to people preparing for baptism. Every single one survives. They cover the creed, the sacraments, the Eucharist, the authority of the Church. They read like a Catholic catechism written 1,600 years early. Most Protestants have never heard of them.

@SHolmes66305 @macrofern Pre trib pre mil all the way

@macrofern I e never heard a Preterist give a good argument on Zechariah 14. It’s always laughable. Hence, my post and your proof—you don’t have one!

I honestly think that if more gentile Christians cared about chapters like Zechariah 14 we could have a theological revival that could truly transition many into a gospel of power and give them understanding to stand for the right things in the days ahead. Zechariah 14 is a very plain, consistent narrative picture regarding Israel’s final covenantal discipline, Jesus second coming, the resurrection of the dead, the judgment of the wicked, the restoration of Israel and Jerusalem, and the millennial reign of Jesus from Jerusalem. It is absolutely one of the most stunning pieces of Scripture in all the Bible and it has clearly never taken place my Preterist friends. If you want to argue eschatology then come up with a good argument against Zechariah 14… YOU DON’T HAVE ONE.