@BishopJaxi “You will know them by their fruits.” These are the fruits of the reformation. LORD Jesus have mercy on us. This is not…good. God is NOT the author of confusion; this is pure confusion.
@TheEXECUTlONER_ “But as impressive that is, I’m more impressed with the support from his wife. Just listen to her praising him and his talent.” yyyyyyyup
@Xtopher_Uzo@bikerbutter It’s not. The reply is practically canned; it’s an autistic mindset. Like wondering around in the same 4x4 circle regardless of what is occurring around you for hours and days on end.
It is more than just repentance as illustrated in Matthew 3 and the testimony of John the Baptist: the Elijah who ushered in the Davidic Kingdom of Jesus of Nazareth, the Christ. The people came down to the water, confessing their sins, were baptized, and called to bear good fruit in keeping with repentance. From Genesis to Revelation, this message is consistent.
In December, an 85-year-old widow called a North Carolina tree removal company, begging for firewood to keep her house warm, but said she couldn't pay them.
Paul Brittain, the owner, delivered the firewood for free, fixed her car, her roof, her heating/AC unit ALL for FREE and then raised $20,000 for her for Christmas.
Ever since, has been maintaining her property, completely for free.
He has never charged her a dime.
This is the America I love!!!!🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸
Yes, be a Berean. That verse changed my life and led me to Scripture deeply til this day and then...miraculously led me back to the Catholic faith 35 years later. I hope this helps.
1 Kings 2:19 — the queen in David’s kingdom was the king’s mother (Gebirah). Jesus is the Davidic King: Luke 1:32–33, so Mary is seen as Queen Mother. Finally, Revelation 11:19 - 12:1 depicts a crowned woman bearing the Messiah. Remember, verses and chapters are a MODERN innovation and did NOT exist until the 12 century; 11 and 12 are meant to flow into one another telling the same story.
New Ark
Luke 1:35 parallels Exodus 40:35 (“overshadow”). Luke 1:43 echoes 2 Samuel 6:9. Mary carries Christ just as the Ark carried God’s presence.
"the title only ever means the mother of the King, which is what the Davidic court actually had — the gebirah, the king’s mother, who reigns nothing and intercedes. It’s a statement about her Son’s throne, not a rival one. Empty it of Him and it collapses, which is the test." For some reason, even for 'bible believing' evangelicals, this concept is impossible for them to grasp even when citing Scriptural context.
Wes Huff preaches Christ as the New Adam who undoes the fall of both Adam and Eve.
But if there’s a New Adam, who’s the New Eve?
Protestants WILL NEVER give you this ANSWER, and you will want to bookmark this as you read to the end.
Huff is right that Adam brought sin and death through a tree and its fruit, and that Christ reverses it by becoming the curse on the tree — “cursed is everyone who hangs on a tree” (Galatians 3:13, Deuteronomy 21:23). That is good and it is true.
But the type is only half-built. Adam did not fall alone. Eve’s “yes” to the serpent came first. So if Christ is the New Adam — and Paul says exactly that, Romans 5:14, 1 Corinthians 15:22 — then the antitype demands a New Eve whose “yes” reverses the first. This is not a medieval invention. Justin Martyr and Irenaeus taught it in the second century: the knot tied by Eve’s disobedience untied by Mary’s obedience.
Follow the tree where it actually leads. In the wilderness the people were dying of serpent bites. The cure was a serpent lifted up on a pole — they had to look at it to live (Numbers 21). Christ names this as Himself: “as Moses lifted up the serpent, so must the Son of Man be lifted up” (John 3:14). That is why the Catholic crucifix keeps Christ on the tree. You look on the One lifted up, and you live. Some refused to look even while it was healing them. That has not changed.
Then the fruit. The first fruit brought death. The fruit that saves is named at the Visitation: “blessed is the fruit of your womb” (Luke 1:42). The New Eve bears the fruit the first tree could not. That fruit is His body.
This is the hinge of why the Mass is not a symbol. The Ark held the word in stone, the manna, and the high priest’s staff. Mary bore the Word made flesh, the true Bread, the eternal High Priest — the Ark of the New Covenant (Revelation 11:19 through 12:1 is one unbroken vision; the chapter break came later). The manna did not give life; the fathers ate it and died (John 6:49). The true Bread does. One sacrifice, lifted up once, made present in every Mass — not repeated, re-presented, moving through time from the one Cross.
None of this divinizes Mary. The Church gives God alone worship. Mary receives veneration as Mother of God — the title defined at Ephesus in 431 to protect who Christ is, not to lift her above Him. This was decisive in my own conversion. I did not understand the Mass was a sacrifice, or what the altar was, until I understood the New Eve who bore the Lamb.
Sola scriptura doesn’t give Protestants an excuse to dismiss the New Eve, because she can be derived through Sacred Scripture.
You cannot have a New Adam without a New Eve. Who bore the fruit that saves us on the tree and where can you find this daily bread?
One image alone portrays accurately the theology and apologetics of @needGod_net , @BibleInContext1 and the like who spend their days like lunatics arguing with themselves and when offered to debate with legit apologists get absolutely decimated. Note, every post by them is a solo-reaction and rebuttal of another video that, once you see, you can’t un-see. Pure lunacy.
He states he's a 'Christian historic researcher and apologist.' To make that claim and NOT...cite the Didache, is perhaps intentional and--if so--dishonest. He did the same...exact thing when on Rogan when citing St. Jerome's reasoning for not originally conceding to the Deutoronical texts because of the lack of ancient Hebrew translations of them, knowing the Dead Sea Scrolls discovery blew that criteria out of the water.
It is also written “there is no prophecy scripture that is a matter of private interpretation.” Do you really need a definition describing the difference between a mediator and an intercessor in the year 2026 with a quantum computer at your fingertips? Please say no. I encourage you to read the Church fathers. What you are describing and claiming was answered literally centuries ago, and has been maintained for thousands of years. What you are aligning with not only doesn’t reflect the Church Christ gave his Apostles and their clear successors, but is a frankly modern innovation of protestanism.