Brent Harris

@TaylorRMarshall DTM don’t you think it’s unreasonable to expect across the board cooperation. We are sooooooooooooooooooooo much better off even if the Republican Party has moved more center.

Catholics are a powerful swing-vote demographic in the USA for most states. Republicans can't afford to offend them. Watch what happens.

@WesleyLHuff The Most misunderstood event in Church History? Again with all do respect I think it’s prudent to just simply say what Church your referring to. It was The Catholic Church Agape

Did a fourth-century church council invent Christianity as we know it? It's one of the most popular claims made by skeptics today — that the divinity of Jesus and the contents of the Bible weren't ancient convictions, but later inventions, decided by committee at the Council of Nicaea in 325 AD. In this the 3rd episode of Can I Trust the Bible?, Wes and Andy head to Turkey and Italy, going straight to the source to find out whether there's any truth to these claims. Did the Council of Nicaea really vote on the Bible, or invent Christ's divinity? The answers might surprise you. Join us on this next adventure as we dig into one of church history's most misunderstood moments, separating myth from fact, and following the evidence where it leads. youtu.be/lpsKNd8tqHI?si…

I notice you don’t mention the word Catholic when referring to Bishops or many other Saints within The Church that you reference during your studies. Wouldn’t it be historically correct to just say the truth in its fullness. I believe you can easily mislead the uninformed. Historically “the Christian leaders” were Catholic Bishops. Agape

Did Emperor Constantine coerce the Christian leaders when he called the Council of Nicaea? As I explain in this clip, standing in front of the Victory Arch of Constantine in Rome, the evidence speaks for itself.

@JamesMartinSJ With all do respect Father, once again I have no idea what you’re trying to accomplish with a post like this.

So God loves only American troops? Not innocent people who lost their lives in Iran? Where was God's "miraculous protection" for them? This is the inevitable result of believing that God is on "our side." It's making a false god in our image: a god who despises Iranians.

@JamesMartinSJ With all do respect what is your point?

Yes, God is indeed good. God also loves the people of Iran.

@marklevinshow What exactly did you gain by saying that. I know you have great things to say from time to time but this isn’t one of them!

Oy, crazier and crazier

Birthright citizenship is a threat to our national security!

Father Chad Ripperger has spent his life as an exorcist. It’s clear to him that demons are in charge of parts of American politics. 0:00 The Connection Between Mental Health and Demon Possessions 7:01 What Are Demons? 26:45 What Is the Mission of Demons? 29:40 Is the United States Under Demonic Attack? 35:16 Child Sacrifice and Pacts With Demons 46:03 The Dangers of Being an Exorcist 48:38 Why Demons Target People in Leadership Positions 51:52 The Similarities Between Communism and Demonism 58:45 Can Demons Possess Animals? 1:05:08 How Does Someone Become Possessed? 1:14:19 The Dangers of Mocking Demons 1:17:42 Occult Knowledge 1:20:36 Why Some Demons Can Only Be Cast Out With Prayer and Fasting 1:27:15 Satanic Ritual Abuse 1:29:47 Are There People Who Choose to Stay Possessed? 1:33:37 How God Uses Demons for Good 1:35:57 How to Avoid Being Possessed 1:40:43 Is the US Doomed? 1:44:27 What Role Do Demons Play in Addiction?

What is Truth? Truth is when the mind conforms to reality. Reality is undocumented criminals being removed from our country is a good thing, reality is men competing in women sports is a slap in the face to women’s rights, reality is letting a 8 year old decide what chromosome they want is child abuse, reality is leadership requires sacrifice and I hope you will sacrifice along side the only party that seems to speak truth these days. Call it what you want but party lines are drawn on what truth and reality are! Thank you for you service and may God grant you the courage to see through the weeds and see reality.

@JimMurrXY2674 @noosphereapp I believe in stating the truth. I oppose folks who base their truth on party position.

Shutdowns are bad policy and bad politics. It’s not fair to our DHS workers. We’re losing the ability to come together and get things done. Our country needs consensus. That’s what the Founders intended. @noosphereapp

@SenSchumer Why are the way you are? Very sad.

See you in court. You will lose.

@Tim_Walz With all do respect grow up

No kings.

@SenatorRicketts Voice vote……. We need leaders with courage

After waiting over a month to even meet, Democrats finally agreed to work with Republicans on a deal that reopens most of the Department of Homeland Security. This does not yet mean the end of the shutdown, as it still has to go through the House. DHS has been shutdown for over forty days. It took over thirty days for Chuck Schumer and Democrat leadership to even consider negotiating with Republicans. This has to stop. It's time for Democrats to put these games aside and work with Republicans to do what's best for the American people.

@RepJeffries With all due respect, you wear me out, as well as millions of other Americans. Could you please just grow up!

Donald Trump voted by mail in today’s special election in Florida. Republicans want to take this right away from everyone else. These extremists are complete and total phonies.

Please share if you agree that the Senate should not recess until it has (1) fully funded DHS, and (2) passed the SAVE America Act

@SenateGOP @SenTedCruz @SenateCommerce Get rid of the filibuster

Democrats are holding our TSA agents hostage because they care more about protecting illegal aliens. They’d like to sell you that they’re working hard, but they couldn’t even show up to work today:

@BasedDavePA If I google who started the Catholic Church that pretty much solves it for me. 💒

The reason why I'm at a crossroad with choosing between Catholicism and Orthodoxy comes down to this: Which side has the better historical connection to the Church Jesus founded in 33 AD? Which side is objectively closer to the early followers of Christ and what they believed.

Keep it simple. One man 1500 years after Jesus’s Church started, where the Septuagint was read in that church, quoted by the apostles in the New Testament cannon that this very Church preserved decided to remove the books because they had truths within them he himself disagreed with, and he thought that the Pharisee Jews Cannon that wasn’t even agreed upon until 47 years after Jesus was crucified was somehow The Old Testament Cannon……. Do we really think Jesus would quote from a book that wasn’t The Word Of God? Make it make sense. I’m with Taylor I’ll stick with the decision of The Church. Although submitting to authority is very difficult for many including the devil himself.

Thanks for your reply. Let me address each point. 1. Yes, "multiple councils and synods before Trent listed the 73-book canon, including the Ecumenical Council of Florence," but the question is what the status of those councils imply about the status of the canon. Though all three lists were materially identical, they weren't normatively identical, and none of the lists were binding or dogmatic. Cajetan was writing 90 years after Florence, which is arguably the strongest case for the 73-book canon pre-Trent, and said this about the deuterocanonicals at the end of his commentary on Esther: "And in this place we conclude the commentaries on the historical books of the Old Testament. For the rest (i.e., Judith, Tobit, and the books of the Maccabees) are reckoned by divine Jerome as outside the canonical books and he places them among the apocrypha, with the book of Wisdom and Ecclesiasticus, as is clear in the Prologus Galeatus. Nor ought you be disturbed if you find somewhere those books reckoned among the canonical, whether in the sacred councils or among the sacred teachers. For the words of both councils and teachers ought to be brought back to the revision of Jerome, and according to his opinion expressed to bishops Chromatius and Heliodorus, those books (and if there are any other similar in the canon of the Bible), are not canonical, i.e., are not normative (regulares) to confirm those things which are of the faith. But they can be called canonical (that is, normative) for the edification of the faithful, as received and authorized in the canon of the Bible. For with this distinction you can discern the things said by Augustine in book 2 of De doctrina christiana, and written in the Council of Florence under Eugene IV, and written in the provincial councils of Carthage and Laodicea, and by Popes Innocent and Gelasius. To the praise and glory of Almighty God, at Rome in the year of salvation 1532, but in the 64th year of my life, on the 19th day of July, Amen." [Ref: Thomas de Vio, In omnes authenticos Veteris Testamenti historiales libros, commentarii (Paris: Soleil d’Or, 1546), 481v–82r.; as quoted in Gallagher, E. L. (2025). The Apocrypha through History. Oxford University Press] So, the Cardinal very high up in the Church, who was tasked with putting Luther in check, argued that the council of Florence ought to be read in light of Jerome's distinction between the canon proper, which has books that can confirm doctrines, and the apocryphal books that should be read only for edification. This shows that right until the eve of Trent the canon was not settled at the highest levels of the Church. So that the lists appeared in councils that didn't dogmatically define the canon doesn't cut much ice. 2. You say, "No one contests that Jerome struggled with this,... But he did outwardly comply with Rome." I'm not sure what you mean by "outward compliance." If by this you mean he did his job of translating the apocrypha, then that's doing what the Church tasked him with doing. But he "outwardly" and "visibly" relegated those 7 texts to a secondary status, a non-canonical status. And that matters the most when it comes to discerning his impact on the Medieval manuscript tradition that upheld his smaller canon, and it matters how others like Cajetan thought those books should be judged in light of Jerome's canonical distinction, which traces back to way before Jerome. 3. This point is confused. You say that because Jerome allowed the apocrypha to be read in Church and most Protestants don't read them in Church that I can't use Jerome, who was your own Church's greatest translator of the Bible, in making a point about the status of those books regarding the canon. I can agree that the 66-book Bible is canonical because it contains the very books Jerome himself would endorse as canonical. That he allowed other books to be read for edification, and that modern Protestants don't by and large do that, doesn't mean I can't reference Jerome on the status of those books as lesser on the very issue of their canonical status. The point you're making is a red herring at best and completely confused at worst. 4. You again make a mistake regarding history. You say, "Jerome is an outlier and is not the Pope or magisterium." Jerome is not an outlier, tough he's obviously not the Pope or magisterium. He represents a tradition, a robust tradition, of Catholics endorsing a smaller canon. Jerome is no minor figure or mere outlier in this regard. Through his translation work and its impact on Medieval manuscript tradition, he exerted a huge impact on the Church. Further, I can set Jerome aside and simply note that one of today's best scholars on the history of the deutrocanonicals had this to say at the end of his detailed historical exposition of their histories. This is right before he discusses Trent, "As the mid-sixteenth century approached, the Catholic opponents of Luther and his movement did not maintain a uniform position on the status of the deuterocanonical books." [Ref: Gallagher, E. L. (2025). The Apocrypha through History. Oxford University Press, p. 172]. Again, until the eve of Trent there wasn't a "uniform position on the status of the deuterocanonical books." It took making denying them anathema for those books to be officially, dogmatically made "canonical" according to the Catholic Church. But, even then there was decent and the matters passed with a mere 44% yes vote. So I wrote a letter to clarify the factual errors in your original letter to Protestants and you've replied to me with red herrings and more errors. Again, you're telling a just-so story that doesn't reflect the actual historical details and its nuance.

I noticed several errors in Dr. Taylor Marshall's letter to Protestants. So I offer a corrected version below, addressed to Catholics. Dear Catholics, Your Bible contains 7 non-canonical books, added by the Council of Trent in 1546 over the objections of your own best bible scholar. Marshall says Jerome "changed his mind" about the deuterocanonical books around 402 AD in obedience to Pope Damasus. I've read Jerome's prefaces. This doesn't hold up. Damasus died in 384. Jerome wrote his famous Prologus Galeatus in 391. It excluded the deuterocanonicals as part of the canon. He labels these books as apocrypha. That's 7 years after Damasus was gone. That's not obedience to a living pope. The quote Marshall uses from Against Rufinus, which reads "What sin have I committed if I followed the judgment of the churches?", isn't about the canon. It's about Jerome's decision to translate from the Hebrew instead of the Septuagint. Rufinus attacked him for it. Jerome defended himself. In context, he's talking about translation method, not about which books belong in the Bible. And Jerome didn't stop his take. I've quoted these before, but here he is for the next 24 years of his life: 391: "Whatever is outside of these is set aside among the apocrypha." 398: The Church reads Tobit and the Maccabees "not for the authoritative confirmation of ecclesiastical doctrines." 405: Tobit is excluded from "the catalogue of Divine Scriptures." Judith is "considered among the apocrypha." 406: Cites the Book of Wisdom with "if one wishes to accept this book." 415: Still distinguishing Wisdom ("lest you gainsay this volume") from Ecclesiastes ("about which there can be no doubt"). This is one of his last works. Gallagher, a top scholar on Jerome on the canon, explains, "All of our evidence indicates that he always considered them outside the canon." Jerome never retracted. He never published a revised list. Never wrote "I was wrong." He translated Tobit and Judith under pressure, finished each in a single day, and attached prefaces denying them canonical status. That's not submission. That's a scholar doing what he's told while making sure everyone knows what he thinks. Dear Catholics, please drop the fan fiction that Jerome submitted to Rome on the canon. He held the same position from 391 until he died in 420. And Trent overruled him 15 centuries later by a vote of 24(Y)-15(N)-16(A). It passed by 44%. Not exactly a passing grade. Surely not one I'd write letters to Protestants about.

The Schumer DHS Shutdown has caused more than 50,000 TSA workers to go unpaid. Many of them are now facing: 🚨empty refrigerators 🚨eviction notices 🚨missed medical payments @SenateDems: Work for the AMERICAN people and put politics aside. Vote to fund @DHSgov! people.com/tsa-employees-…

Democrats are denying the pay of roughly 120,000 employees of the Department of Homeland Security — fueling the third longest shutdown in American history. They REFUSE to reopen TSA and FEMA unless they can reopen our borders for criminal illegal aliens. There is really only one word to describe their position: CRAZY!

If you’re waiting in a long line at the airport, call @chuckschumer’s office and tell him to fun @DHSgov. (202) 224-6542