Video

You mean the catechism that contradicts 2000 years of Church teachings? The one that’s been corrected twice?

We're justified by works and not faith alone because faith alone shows nothing, no obedience, no doing the will of God, no spiritual transformation etc. People can say they believe anything in their minds BUT action Proves your talk. Faith if justified by works because it shows obedience. If you don't walk it, you can't exactly say you truly have faith... you're just saying it. Faith is a verb. Why do you call me lord and not do what i say? Go and make disciples, baptize them and teach them to observe ALL things He commands. 1 John clarifies...This is the message we have heard from him and proclaim to you, that God is light and in him is no darkness* at all. If we say we have fellowship with him while we walk in darkness, we lie and do not live according to the truth; but if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship with one another, and the blood of Jesus his Son cleanses us from all sin. - 1 John 1:5-7. If we say we have faith but walk in darkness (no obedience), we lie!

Glad to have discovered your channel.

I love Ignatius & Scott Hahn and the Ignatius Bible seems great, but let’s not forget how poor of a selection we Catholics have to choose from among the RSVCE and RSV2CE, for example the best ‘looking’ RSVCE I can find is from Oxford whereas Ignatius Press has a stranglehold on their 2nd Edition. I just wish there was a perfect scenario where there was more formats and aesthetics for the RSVCE the same way the (transient) NABRE has.

The liberal notes in the New American Bible are hugely problematic. That is why I prefer to use the Douay-Rheims Bible & The Orthodox Study Bible.

Have you used the hardcover version of the ESV-CE? If so, would you recommend it or the paperback one you reviewed here? Thanks!

The ESV is simply too evangelical and not as ecumenical as the RSV; the RSVCE is probably the best Catholic Bible overall for general use while others serve more niche purposes.

The RSV2CE also says "full of grace" for kecharitomene...which is why I stick with the Douay and RSV haha *the New Catholic Bible translation also says Full of Grace but I havent read that cover to cover yet so I've no strong opinion on the quality of the translation on whole.

Beware! I bought the NABRE Bible soon after I converted to Catholicism. And was I disappointed! Right away upon reading the notes on key scriptures, I realized how liberal it is. I immediately sent it back to Christian Book Distributers.

I’m pretty comfortable with the Protestant position on the issues you raise here. For example, although it secondary in this video, I think John 6:53 has to be understood in context along with John 6:63. But I will certainly acknowledge that the Bible can only be understood by means of interpretation. We believe our beliefs about the Bible, and not - in some unmediated way - the Bible itself. I’d also affirm that both the cannon and the creeds within we operate are gifts from the ancient church. More than any other issue, I think Christians must resolve their ecclesiology in order to discern between Catholicism and Protestantism. That is, did Jesus establish - for lack of a better word - an institution or is the church more organic? Because I believe the latter to be true, I celebrate the gifts of the ancient church as a Protestant. If I leaned in a more institutional way, I think I’d have to sort out whether to become Catholic or perhaps Orthodox.

Does this new Ignatius Catholic Study Bible conflict with Douay Rheims and/or Old KJV?

So I guess discernment isn’t your strong suit.

The real issue is that the Catholics simply don’t understand the first commandment, and thus they think it is redundant. It’s a deep dive into Old Testament theology to help one understand this that I don’t have the space or time to go into in this comment.

More verses for Catholics Paul judged Peter. Galatians 2:11 But when Cephas came to Antioch, I opposed him to his face, because he stood condemned. Paul seeks approval from all apostles in Jerusalem not Peter in Rome Galatians 2:9 and recognizing the grace that had been given to me, James and Cephas and John, who were reputed to be pillars, gave to me and Barnabas the right hand of fellowship, so that we might go to the Gentiles and they to the circumcised. Justification is by faith alone Romans 4:2 For if Abraham was justified by works, he has something to boast about-but not before God! Jesus granted the kingdom to all apostles not just Peter. Luke 22:29 and I grant you a kingdom, just as My Father granted one to Me, Faith is a gift to the elect. Acts 13:48 And when the Gentiles heard this, they began rejoicing and glorifying the word of the Lord, and as many as had been appointed to eternal life believed. Salvation is by Grace through faith which is also a gift. Ephesians 2:8,9 For by grace you have been saved through faith, and this not of yourselves, it is the gift of God; 9 not of works, so that no one may boast. Jesus taught the disciples to pray to God not Mary or the Saints. Matthew 6:9 “Pray, then, in this way: ‘Our Father who is in heaven, Hallowed be Your name. Tradition is subject to scripture Mark 7:13 thus invalidating the word of God by your tradition which you have handed down; and you do many things such as that.” Acts 17:11 Now these were more noble-minded than those in Thessalonica, for they received the word with great eagerness, examining the Scriptures daily to see whether these things were so. Peter had a wife 1 Corinthians 9:5 Do we not have authority to take along a believing wife, even as the rest of the apostles and the brothers of the Lord and Cephas? Mary is not the queen of heaven or the mother of God because she has a crown in Revelation 12:1. As the elders of the church have crowns and that doesn’t make them kings of heaven. Revelation 4:4 Around the throne were twenty-four thrones, and upon those thrones I saw twenty-four elders sitting, clothed in white garments, and golden crowns on their heads. Buying spiritual gifts like indulgences is accursed Acts 8:20 But Peter said to him, “May your silver perish with you, because you supposed you could obtain the gift of God with money Scripture is inspired, tradition is not 2 Timothy 3:16 All Scripture is God-breathed and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness, Capital punishment is Biblical Romans 13:4 for it is a minister of God to you for good. But if you do what is evil, be afraid; for it does not bear the sword in vain, for it is a minister of God, an avenger who brings wrathon the one who practices evil. Jesus had brothers Matthew 13:55- “Is not this the carpenter’s son? Is not His mother called Mary, and His brothers, James and Joseph and Simon and Judas? Marrying Gods word to Philosophy like Aquinas did is forbidden Colossians 2:8 See to it that no one takes you captive through philosophy and empty deception, according to the tradition of men, according to the elementary principles of the world, and not according to Christ. The church is only the pillar of the truth when it teaches salvation by faith and grace alone, when its sole authority is Christ alone speaking in scripture. When it doesn’t sell spiritual gifts like indulgences. When it doesn’t attempt to blend Paul and Jesus with Plato and Aristotle. When it teaches mankind to pray to God and not Mary or the Saints. Calling yourself a church doesn’t make you one as any Catholic Theologian would agree. I pray you will examine these passages from God’s holy and authoritative word.

Thank you for your explanation of your journey! I find myself asking questions about where I truly stand in regard to the catholic faith having come from a evangelical background! I cannot reconcile the pope leadership especially when he is embracing the Muslim community. Mike in the UK

There is no contradiction...context matters, my friend...one must exegete the entirety of James 2:14-26...

Absolutely throw it away. Just make sure you get a KJV Bible, so you will have the truth!

I'm generally uncomfortable with rehashed protestant translations that are stamped "Catholic". The first thing I look at is Luke 1:28. The RSVCE has Luke 1:28 written as "...O highly favored one...". This is corrected in the RSVCE2 written as "... Hail, full of grace...". The correct translation of this is easily proven through the Greek manuscripts. I'm also uncomfortable with the fact that all modern bibles use the Masoretic text for the Old Testament. I am pretty sure that when St. Pope Damasus I commissioned jerome to translate scripture into Latin, he was expecting jerome to use the LXX, not a proto-masoretic version. Even St. Augustine begged jerome not to do this. Why is it that Catholics have never had a complete bible with the LXX? Compare Acts 7:14 to Genesis 46:27 in your modern bible and the LXX.

May I just comment that the cover of this vlog an old bible being thrown into the waste can is desecrating!

Can this catechism be trusted, or has it been tainted by “synodalism” and it’s big brother “Modernism”? Can it be trusted?

If you were correct, then James would contradict Romans. The first law of Hermeneutics is "God does not contradict Himself." God is the ultimate author of scripture as it is He that moves the writer. They don't make it up themselves. Saving faith produces works. No one is justified by works.

It pretty much doesn't matter which version of the Bible you use, they're all written by men, from the male perspective (which is often chauvinistic). It's also a religion about Jesus. While there are the elements of Jesus' religion in it (fatherhood of God and brotherhood of man), it pedestalizes the Master. Convenient for folks who like to believe Jesus was the only one who could do what he did, letting themselves off the hook for being likewise as bold as he was. Now we have a new version of Jesus' Life and Teachings in part IV of the Urantia Book, filling in all the missing years of his life, and clearing up numerous misconceptions.

Just want to say that your presentation is excellent. The script is tight, the lighting is good, audio is great. Just really great video. Catholic CZcamsr's take notes! This is how its done.

Wow, I love printed books again.

Look to Jesus. Not systems.

Do you know if they omitted anything from the stand-alone NT edition to make the complete edition more manageable? Also, do you have any idea if there will be a stand-alone OT edition available?

Ok

How do I submit a question? I have one that would be great for you or Jim Papandrea. I stumbled across 1 John 5:6-8. It seems super Catholic. Like a verse I would have skipped over in my Protestant days. But then I noticed the translations are wildly different. It looks like KJV and Douay Rheims an addition (a very lovely Trinitarian addition) that isn't there in modern translation, either Catholic or Protestant. I'd love to understand what's going on, what manuscripts are being used where, and if the verse implies anything super Catholic with the water and blood. Thanks!

That NABRE thing has _got_ to be better than that "The Way" translation that was all over in the 1980s. On one hand, kudos to the Church for being so secure in its foundations it didn't feel it had to fear liberal scholarship, confident the Truth would prevail. However, more than a generation of Catholic kids were raised hearing only the revisionist angle, effectively undermining the Church as an institution.

Modern scholarship certainly shines new light on much of the New Testament.

Please Mr. Doug will the new complete study Bible include the concordance?

Thanks Douglas for this , I had noticed the difference and wondered why .

Technically and historically the Reformation movement was based on 1. Henry VIII’s desire for a male heir and 2. Luther’s anger toward selling of indulgences. Sure, it eventually evened out to exactly Sola Scriptura and sola fide. Now, he also misses the point of what most Protestants believe about Sola Scriptura, we don’t believe it is the only source, just the final source. I have tried and cannot get more than a couple of minutes in after he says this video will be different than reuses the same old Catholic talking points. A. We believe scripture s the final authority. So, when tradition or dogma goes against specific scripture we think it should be discarded. The average Catholic will either twist a scripture out of context to fit their point or chide us for “only” following the Bible which seems deceptive. B. James 2 is about living your faith. He believed if you actually read it, that people’s acts will show their faith. God only knows our hearts, so James was talking about how you can show others your faith. Works do not save, Period. We do not “cooperate” in the gift f Jesus Christ. It is Christ alone. So, no, James doesn’t present a problem at all.

First you should understand the context of the word, in salivation there is work that work has done Yes but Jesus Christ did it this is it we are not saying work has no contribution no we are saying human being could do it but Jesus Christ does for all human beings so this is the point, after we get born again yes we do work according to bible thanks Be blessed

Thoughts on the Little Rock Catholic Study Bible?

I will never throw away a Bible. But point taken!

Excellent excellent.. clear as crystal

I am not Catholic but I have been using the Ignatius Catholic Study Bible New Testament and I really appreciate it. I have few of the OT books individually. I am eagerly awaiting the whole Bible!!! It is excellent.

I have the ICSB, I love it and I am not a Catholic. ps I love Fulton J Sheen.

For English, get a Douay-Rheims Bible (D-R) with commentary. Still the best IMHO.

The Catholic church is rife with idolatry and blasphemy. The Catholic church came out of the Nicolaitan church mentioned in Revelations chapter 2 about the Ephesians. The Catholic church has a history of burning Christians at the stake because they didn't believes exactly as the church taught. Read the book : Fox's Book of Martyrs:. The history of Catholicism is full of Satanic ideas and is getting worse. I believe that there are real Christians in the church but they don't know the history of the Catholic church. Open your eyes and don't follow deceptive teachings like this one. Don't cherry pick bible verses to make a point, use the full bible to get a well rounded view.

The reason you struggled to anchor those points of interpretation and Canon was to find an objective solution against a subjective seemingly failible view. However, if you think about it, the tradition of the RC church also remains as much subjective as we individuals are. Being a group and an old organization doesn't make it automatically true and authoritative. This apparent objective anchor gives mental assurance or security in faith that we are on the right path. I have observed the same objective security is given to the illogical faith alone for Protestants as they think they have no responsibility and accountability of works. You want to trace your faith to something authoritative and objective, and such an allegiance to an earthly organization/Church/tradition or a doctrine like faith alone becomes an idol, as it gives us outward assurance of security. We should focus on direct relation with God and spiritual assurance. Jesus is our sole mediator and we need no church and tradition to anchor our faith on. The problem of the authority and inspired nature of the Vatican falls against its predecessor Sanhedrin and the oral law of Rabbinic Judaism. Who is to say the Sanhedrin was not operating as infallible divine authority for condemning Christ ? And how come God took away that divine authority from his infallible council to form another. The transition from Sanhedrin to Vatican shouldn't make sense. We also have flip flops of doctrines from RC, and popes condemning each other which proves it cannot be trusted as infallible authority. They are as much humans as we are. Lastly, you should not base your faith on the Canon and orthodoxy. I reject traditional orthodoxy altogether as I reject Luther. There is no obligation to accept a particular Canon and a traditional doctrine as orthodoxy. I encourage not just the largest Canon but also the study of Talmud, bec our roots of the faith are Jewish, not Roman. The Church should be understood as a spiritual entity to avoid logical problems with the succession of faith, where we trace it back to truth via the scripture without relying blindly on tradition. Also there shouldnt be a false dichotomy of Catholics vs Protestant that we should be forced to pick either of these two sects or branches. Study how the orthodox Trinity had a begotten smaller god from the one God the father; and they also corrupted the deity referejces to reduce his status as the one God with the father; some of them are explained in Orthodox Corruption book. Also see all changes of God and Savior on punctuation level; the Jude 5 and 25 Jesus became Lord; and John 1:18 only God became begotten son etc. The NT doesn't teach a begotten god, it refers to the incarnation as begotten. Monogenes doesnt mean unigenitus but unicus. If you insist on the flesh and blood passage to be a literal ritual, how can you reject the same ritual of tephilin phylactery by the Jews who twisted the commands to tie the words in your heart and mouth to meditate on them day and night? In order to find an objective anchor for the orthodoxy and Canon you have chosen another idol replacing the faith alone tradition of Luther, with unexplainable areas to be compromised. If you give up the tradition of orthodoxy and its authority for determining Canon as divine and inspired, then you will free yourself from the burdens of embarassing compromise which comes with tradition of idols. Also do not hold to any other presuppositional idol like inerrancy of the bible, which is the biggest idol of Protestants. Embrace the human authorship of the bible as they were humans like you are, and God can inspire you today to preach his word exactly the same way.

You have made some good points of translation problems. I would love to have more Apocrypha editions of the ESV in cheaper forms such as the Church Bible by Crossway. The Evangelical world has really deprived itself of the knowedge by suppressing the larger Canon. Now, the SPCK ESV editions have indeed replaced this Augustine edition I think, as they must be cheaper to buy and also come in lots of variety. I have made a long review for ESV for future update in my review, docs.google.com/document/d/1VRius0Tt4DK6Ml3yk9BHbdGGnKQOjxC0Y69I1IqFmnc/

Thanks pre ordered a copy

No problem here. It is stated over and over and over again in Scripture that you are saved by your faith in Christ. You show your faith to others by what you do and how you live. Salvation is a free gift.

Does the NABRE have the imprimatur? Will the new one?

To me the real question is how is works defined? Is it “works” as in labor? Helping around the church, helping the poor, etc? Or is works synonymous with fruit? Fruit being that you live your life so others can see Christ in you?

As a Catholic, there are several ways to engage protestants in "proofs", disregarding their personal fallible interpretations of scripture. I like to simply say or ask, "I bet my church is more biblical than yours?" As you said in your video, they can theologize all they want, but buy asking the above question you can show that Catholic interpretation is way more consistant and historical then what they believe in. I like to start with "authority" as protestants have no real answers as to how the 1st century church did authoritative "binding and loosing" actions. It becomes very evident quickly that protestant churchs don't do anything the Bible talks about "authoritatively". They use their protestant "traditions" to deny almost everything. Example: Acts 20:28 There is nothing but authority in this verse. Where is the protesant authority to rule (bind and loose)? Thus my church (Catholic) is more biblical than your. I could go on for ever and sometimes I do. At the end of a very long list of scripture, the Catholic Church is way more biblical that any protestant body of Sola believers. Thanks for the video.

The thief on the cross was forgiven by Jesus just before the thief died. It is unlikely that the thief committed more sinful acts after he was forgiven. As a result, and in all likelihood, he was at that point without sin and saved.

Have to love the casual condescension throughout the vid. That *really* makes you look like a fair, trustworthy presenter.