The clip was just a poke in the eye to express my dissatisfaction. It was something I was working with at the time is all? I know it is silly to ask but did you actually watch it and if so ... got any comments.

To show the importance of unity in the one Church of Christ, St.Paul taught that  "There is one body and one Spirit....one hope...one Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God and Father of us all who is above all and through all and in all." St.Paul got this teaching from Christ and then he in turn taught it to the Church in Ephesus. Ephesians 4:4-6,

Keeping this passage in mind....I will press the distinction between the one Christian religion (Christianity) and the many, many sects within the Protestant religion. 

I'm a stickler for details and here they are.

Christianity is the one holy religion of God's making, the one Christian Faith Christ taught and it was first called Catholicism in 107 AD by St.Ignatius. Jesus Christ established one definite Church to which He gave His teaching authority to teach all Truth until the end of the world. St.Mat. 16:15-19 and 28:16-20.

This is no doubt a popular expression but an incorrect one.

In popular usage, Christianity is used in reference to all those forms of religion which profess belief in Christ. This way of speaking lacks precision and correctness. In reality, Christianity rightly signifies only the religion of Christ..His truths and teachings correctly and completely presented.

Christianity CANNOT signify a multitude of sects blending isolated truths of the one true religion of Christ  with various errors which form the basis of division amongst the Protestant sects themselves.

For example the Baptist sect accepts such truths as the divinity of Christ, the Resurrection, the Virgin Birth of Christ, but these truths are not what defines the Baptists. What defines the Baptists are those truths of the one true religion of Christ they reject...namely the necessity of the Sacrament of Baptism, and specifically of baptizing infants. This rejection is heretical and an error.

The first traces of the Baptist sect appeared in 1521. Martin Luther began the Protestant revolt against the CC in Germany in 1517. In 1521, Thomas Munzer set up as a prophet on his own account claimed that Luther did not go far enough in establishing his ideas. He taught that no one who had been baptized as an infant was really baptized at all. His adherents had to be baptized again. From this his followers got the name of "Anabaptists" or the "Rebaptizers". It was almost 100 years before this Protestant movement spread to England. The first English Baptists were John Smyth and Thomas Helwys. The Baptist church therefore traces itself back to 1611 in England and indirectly to 1521 on the continent. Prior to that, the various Baptist sects, the various Baptist churches were non-existent.

As far as religion I'm talking about true Christianity which is Christ's truths given us both written (Bible) and oral (Tradition).

Hebraic Judaism was God's holy revealed religion. It had both written and oral Tradition as its deposit of the Jewish Faith and so too does Christ's New Testament religion. Like it or not, accept it or not....that's just the way it is.

One Tradition of Hebraic Judaism was the Passover meal. God instructed how it would be and then the specific way they celebrated it was passed down from generation to generation.  That's sacred Tradition. Another example of Tradition is that God taught the Israelites how He wanted them to be in the Temple for worship and sacrifices. That was passed on from generation to generation down to the time of Christ. That's sacred Tradition.

We agree that Christ warned against "traditions of men". Totally agree.

Those Pharisees and were rebellious and not in line with Hebraic Judaism as God had laid out. So they weren't being religious, they were being irreligious. Big difference. When in the Temple, instead of following Tradition, and doing what they were supposed to be doing there; what they had been taught; they had turned the Temple into a marketplace, a den of thieves.  That's why Christ took his cord and made a whip and threw them out.  

So there are two types of traditions...sacred Tradition and traditions of men. You are rightfully warning against traditions of men, but seem to know nothing of sacred Tradition that is found in the Bible.

The Bible does in fact state that some of Christ's teachings were committed to Tradition, that is His teachings were transmitted and handed down by the Apostles orally.

"Stand firm, and hold the traditions you have learned, whether by word or of letters of ours". 2Thess. 2:51.

"And we charge you, brethren, in the name of Our Lord Jesus Christ, to withdraw from every brother who lives irregularly, and not according to the traditions received from us." 2 Thess. 3:6.

There is no questioning the meaning of those texts. Here St.Paul specifically states that there are not one but 2 criteria of Christian truth; that which was left to the Church via Sacred Scripture, via the written word, and that which was left to the Church via tradition, via the unwritten word, in other words by word of mouth, both of which he says are of equal importance to the Christian deposit of Faith. 

And why was it necessary to give some of Christ's truths to the Chruch via the unwritten word by word of mouth rather than by letter?

The BIble furnishes us this answer....

"This is the disciple who bears witness concerning these things, and who has written these things and we know that his witness is true. There are, however, many other things that Jesus did; but if everyone of these things should be written, not even the world itself, I think,  could hold the books that would have to be written."   St.John 21:24-25.

So we have the Bible's own word for it that there were some things which Christ said and did that were not written down, that did not find their way into the Bible. Not becasue they were unimportant but rather becasue it would have involved an impossible writing assignment.

Had the Apostles and their disciples attempted to record all of Our Lord's doings and teachings, they wouldn't have had time for preaching, teaching and organizing and administering the Sacraments to the soul starved masses, the majority of whom could not read anyway.

They did however transmit all that Christ taught via Tradition, that is by word of mouth. Those truths of Christ have been transmitted to Catholics since Apostolic times.

The Church transmits the fullness of Christ's truths through Sacred Scripture and Sacred Tradition. We call the fullness of Christ's truths,  the Deposit of Faith.

Right or true religion is important because God's plan of Salvation is important. Salvation is about practicing Christ's New Covenant religion which is the way we get to know, love and serve God here in this world so we can be with Him in eternity.

and Jesus condemned their oral tradition all over the gospels.  That's what I'm saying about the RCC.  Just like the religious leaders of Judaism had their oral traditions and outside books, so too does the RCC. 

You're defending what Jesus condemned.  That's just the way it is. 

Here's an example of an oral law.  They honored their traditions more than written scripture: 

"Then came to Jesus, scribes and Pharisees (religious elect) which were of Jerusalem saying, why do the disciples transgress the tradition of the elders?  for they wash not their hands when they eat bread.  But HE (Jesus) answered and said to them, Why do you also transgress the commandment of God by your tradition?  "  Matt 15:1-3

so the question is...how do you know the oral tradition you so love, isn't exactly the same type of thing the religious Jews not only set up themselves but were burdening their people to follow?  By doing so, they were in effect, the blind leading the blind. 

KFC, I don’t have a bone to pick with religion in general, it is just not for me. However whenever you guys quote your holy words, it always brings me back to what came first the chicken or the egg. In the real world, you cannot just write something down in a book and then just use that book alone to prove anything is even valid let alone true. I am not a theology major nor do I study scripture … why should I as it serves no useful purpose??? You know, it doesn’t matter who I seek out for material because if the material isn’t in compliance with Religious dogma, well then, the author is stupid, doesn’t know anything about scriptures or hates the Church, etc. etc. Even stranger is when one quotes the Bible itself (the presumed word of God), they get slammed for misusing the ‘meaning’ of God’s word, go figure. Creationists are the worst skeptics in the world concerning everything that is not Church sanctioned, but sadly all it takes for absolute proof for you guys is to find what you want in some vague form of scripture or in the Bible and presto it is the undeniable truth. Obviously you do not understand the word ‘proof' in the real world.
 
“I showed you one. Of course you didn't find one because you want to believe this.” Unlike you, I do not have an agenda so I am open to the word of man which you (Church and Co.) openly despise. I cannot believe you actually wrote the underlined words, hehehe. And how is it that this doesn’t apply foremost to you and your religious co-conspirators I wonder indeed??? Well like it or not, the Age of Aquarius is fast approaching and this God issue will be decided for you by the followers of the next messiah (not going to be one though). That is the way of religions as history teaches us. If you wipe out the last few hundred years of reality (bet you wish you could) you might still be riding high but … reality came to pass anyway and you cannot deal with it but I can. The next ‘religion’ (as you are want to classify it) is already here and flourishing and it is this 'new religion' that will ensure no more superstitions gain seats of power in the New Age.
 
Humm … Sacred traditions passed down through hundreds of generations of infallible and incorruptible human beings living in a world of sin (like today). You do remember one of those spreaders of the truth betrayed your Jesus … but he was the only one. Well, there was Judah too among many others so what goes. I know how you can cite number and accompanying parable with nary a falter even though you probably have to look most of them up just the same as I do … but they couldn’t write … or read … or use a Xerox machine.  Continuity my butt … but it must be true … Just remember what I said above as you try to mask the Age of Aries but that is alright because all you are charged to do is contend with your ‘two fish’. Maybe you forgot that God supposedly destroyed all living creatures on the Earth because of rampant human materialism (not sure of the fish though for obvious reasons) except for the contents of the Ark ... so how was it that these Sacred Traditions were maintained, just a thought.

Flakey101,

Sorry I've taken so long to reply...

Lula posts:

God is the Creator and we are His created ones. For what purpose was man created? Was it for anything in the world? No. God created us for Himself and so our end is God and supernatural happiness. We were created in the image and likeness of God. Likeness, in that we have a spiritual soul which is immortal, makes the body live, endowed with reason and is also gifted with free will.

We were made for God and He has willed that we shall have an opportunity to know, love and serve Him in this world to be with Him in the next...a great destiny. We owe all we have to God and reason and justice demands that we render a suitable acknowledgment to the fact of God which must be expressed in the duties of true religion which implies acts of worship of God, both private and public and obedience due Him in the way prescribed by Him.

God will not have any forced love or service and so we are at liberty to freely side either with God or against Him and to choose between good and evil. 

If man were not free he could not be held responsible for his conduct and could neither merit commendation by good actions nor condemnation for evil actions.

To all men, God gives sufficient grace for their salvation.Again, one spends his time in this life freely choosing for or against God.

Then comes death, judgment, Heaven or Hell.

If one goes to Hell, it will be because he/she freely chose to do so.

God's supernatural (Divine) Revelation to us is a big thing. It's the way we "know" God other than by natural reason. 

Yes, I love both Sacred Scripture and Sacred (Apostolic) Tradition which the Church recognizes as equal and must be believed as firmly as the Bible because it contains the unwritten word of God. I'm Divinely guided by both. Can't have one without the other if you want the fullness of God's Divine Revelation. Seems to me a truth seeker who truly wants to "know" God would want the fullness of His Divine Revelation.

Remember there are 2 traditions mentioned in the Bible...Sacred Tradition and "traditions of men." As far as not religious but rather the irreligious Jews, you've given the texts which condemn their "traditions of men" and I've said I absolutely agree.

At the same time, as far as Sacred (Apostolic)Tradition, I've shown that Scripture itself states that it does not contain all that Christ revealed. These truths not found in Scripture are found only in Apostolic Tradition. I've also shown that Scripture itself guarantees Apostolic Tradition to be a sound source of Christian faith and doctrines. That's because Christ Himself established Sacred Tradition as the main vehicle by which His teachings would be preserved in the Church and communicated to all throughout the ages until the end of time.

He demanded Faith in His doctrines as they were preached by the oral teaching of His Apostles. 

Remember  that the first Christians owed their Faith, not to the written word, but to the Church and its Divine authority to preach and teach all that Christ has taught. Before a line of the NT was written, it was the early Church who preached Christ to the first converts. Jesus commanded no writings but told them to preach and teach His truths...all of them...the total deposit of Faith. Jesus promised, "He who hears you, hears Me". It was on the Apostles and disciples testimony that the first converts believed in Christ. The  point is Faith didn't come from reading Sacred Scripture for it hadn't been yet written! The early converts accepted the teaching authority of the CC represented by the Apostles. 

The Apostolic Traditions St.Paul was exhorting the Thessalonians to stand firm and hold on to were not included in the New Testament but have been preserved and handed down completely in the CC.

So, Apostolic Tradition as opposed to Pharisaical "traditions of men" is the revealed truths taught by Christ and His Apostles which were given to the Church only by word of mouth, though they were later put in writing by the Fathers of the Church who were disciples of the Apostles or comtemporaries of those disciples. 

Besides the writings of the Fathers, the truths of Apostolic Tradition may be found in the writings of the Doctors of the Church, decrees of Popes and Councils, and the liturgy of the Chruch as found in the Missal and rituals.

Next up I'll give you some specific examples of the Divine truths of Apostolic Tradition.

Slavery is an interesting word don’t you think? Neither Jesus nor St. Paul, nor any other Biblical figure is recorded as saying anything in opposition to the institution of slavery and yet it was the mainstay for labor throughout these tumultuous times. Nothing is simple when dealing with religions, go figure. Whenever you guys communicate with us mortals you just take the high road. You will accept absolutely nothing outside your particular circle of influence as even remotely-possibly true simply because you claim that only you (and you and you and…) are capable of telling the truth??? From this self-imposed omnipotent (usurped) attitude and with the demeanor of a badger … you expect to communicate with the human race … how??? You belittle and deride everything anyone says contraire to your beliefs (not against you) or anyone you perceive as a threat to your specific dogma … and you classify everything contraire to your specific superstitions as ‘enemies of the Church (surely someone’s Church). This is important … it was never their (our) decision, that onus falls on your shoulders alone (you are your own worst enemy). Anyway … it is not because their arguments lack merit; it is always because of your pompous claims of ‘the truth’ and your inability to concede merit to anyone besides yourselves. You people are so enlightened that you argue particulars ‘of the truth’ even amongst yourselves, go figure. You do not deal well with logic, science, common sense or man’s knowledge because you feel that man is little more than a pet.

OK. I understand that now!

Then why hit and run?

The clip does no such thing. It is merely someone's opinion and he is entitled to his opinion as you are yours. 

But here is the point. When it comes to Almighty God and His revelations it is not a matter of human opinions. It's a matter of God's teaching and neither your opinions nor my/KFC's opinions have any value if they contradict that.

As far as your slam against the CC....

The CC and Catholic doctrine is not my opinion, but rather Christ's doctrine who sent the Church to teach in His name.

Until we prove a thing it's a matter of opinion. If Almighty God had never given a revelation about His true religion and Church, it would be a matter of opinion. When the Creator speaks the creature must simply accept. God sent His Son Jesus Christ who establishe done definite Church to which He gave His teaching authority. So here we have God's decision and we must accept it.

If our human opinions suggest anything against the teachings of Christ, or against the teachings of His Church as per Sacred Scripture and Tradition, we just renounce our own fallible ideas as being foolish notions of untaught or ignorant children. 

Every one of the person's in the clip claims can be refuted with the effort of a little research. 

As I see it, the clip is just your way of shooting and reloading!

All these slams against God, mocking the Bible and the Chruch as KFC has already said, tickle only the ears of those who want desperately to hear his opinions. 

I wrote an article about this very topic....you may find it interesting.

https://forums.joeuser.com/307297

The Old Testament isn't completely obsolete because some of it contains the Natural Law, so, in that way, it has perennial value. The OT is the Word of God and will always until the end of time be the Word of God and still deserves total respect.

The Old Mosaic Covenant enjoined moral, legal and liturgical precepts. The legal and liturgical precepts are done, over with,  since there is no longer the Temple, the Aaronic Priesthood, etc. However, the moral precepts of the OT, namely the 10 Commandments, still hold in the New Covenant. They must for they are, for the most part, Divine positive promulgations of the Natural or Moral Law. Our Lord Jesus Christ gave them greater weight and meaning.

The guy in the clip is decrying the legal precepts of the OT but what he doesn't understand is that the legal and liturgical precepts were laid down by God for a specific stage in salvation history, that is, up to the coming of Christ and Christians are not obliged to observe them.  

Anyway, through Christ, in Christ, and with Christ, the New completes the Old.

I'm thinking of St.Matt. 5:17-18.

In the Old, God spoke through His law and the prophets, but in the New, He speaks through His Son. Christ completes what went before and puts it in new light. Such is what happened with the Sabbath observance. The whole law is brought to perfection and the process begins with Christ. Everything must be accomplished and not one word of God will pass away until "all is accomplished".

God, Creator of all things, including time and space, is eternal. He is, always was and always will be. Time and space are co-terminus with creatures and they too had a beginning and they too will have an end.

The enemies of Almighty God will try to get rid of Sacred Scripture and the CC for that matter, but they are both here and will be until the end of time. We have Christ word on that. 

I guess it won't surprise you that I disagree with some of this and the reason is that the Third Commandment of the Old Law goes to Natural or Moral Law and that part of it can not be changed or abrogated for it's one of God's unchangeable commandments. I think we may disagree over what "keep holy" means.

"Remember thou keep holy the Sabbath day" was partly moral, the natural law, obliging all men to devote some time exclusively to the worship of GOd and partly ceremonial in as much as the Jews had a divine authoritative right to detemine the time and the details of its observance.They chose the 7th day in honor of God's completion of His Creation as you said.  

For Christians, the Sabbath became the Lord's Day and the commandment is "Remember thou keep holy the Lord's day."

The Church would not/could not ever abrogate the natural law part of God's command which obliges all Christians to devote some time exclusively to the worship of God, and that Scripture testifies the Apostles did. Acts. 20:7. So for the early Chruch and the Chruch today, it wasn't just a matter of rest, it was also a matter of worshipping God on the Lord's Day. That's what "keep holy" means.

The Lord's Day is celebrated in the CC, "from the rising of the sun unto the going down thereof" (Malachais) as it was celebrated by the Apostles and the Christians in the catacombs by the "Breaking of Bread", later called the Holy Mass. 

With the end of the mission of Hebraic Judaism came a change, not in the Commandment, but rather the selection of Sunday to supercede the Saturday sabbath of which, as you said, was selected by the Jews for the Jews only.

What the sabbath was to the Jews, while they were "a kingdom of priests, a holy nation" Ex. 9:16, the sabbath of the New Covenant is to the Christians, since they became the "chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation." 1St.Peter 2:9.

Re: the highlighted:

While the NT does not contain the word, Sunday, it has in it the equivalent, "the Lord's Day". While there is no announcement of a change of sabbath day there, it does not lack evidence the first Christians assembled on the first day of the week for their religious solemnities.

The Apostles, to whom Our Lord gave the power to "bind and loose" met on the first day of the week, the Lord's Day to fulfill the requirements of the Third Commandment. They who were the teaching body of the universal Church Christ established, the Catholic Church, exercised their infallible power of changing the seventh day sabbatical reckoning.

The Apostles could and did change the time, the motive and the details of the Sunday observance. The day of the week to Sunday. They made it commemorate the Resurrection of Christ instead of the Creation. they mitigated in great measure the severity of the Jewish law, abolishing for example, the death penalty Ex. 31:15 and certain prohibitions. Ex. 35:3.

Now, Apostolic Tradition absolutely confirms what is here.

The Didache, Doctrine of the Twelve Apostles written between 65 and 80 reads, "On the Lord's day come together and break bread. And give thanks, offering the Eucharist, after confessing your sins that your sacrifice might be pure."

In 110, St.Ignatius, a contemporary of St.John, spoke of Christians as "not sabbathizing" but living in the spirit of the Lord's Day."  In 112, Pliny wrote much the same, in 140, Justin Martyr, in 170, St.Melito, Bishop of Sardis, in 200, Tertullian of Carthage, in 253, St. Cyprian, Bishop of Carthage, in 300, St.Peter of Alexandria, and the list goes on. 

The Catholic Church requires Catholics to keep Sunday by hearing Holy Mass, and by resting from servile work.

The abstention from servile work is first mentioned by Tertullian who speaks of "deferring even our business on the Lord's Day. lest we give place to the devil.". 

Catholics are told from the pulpit that they should not work on Sunday unless it is absolutely necessary. Yet we see so many that do and this is an absolute scandal. That's why the guy in the clip had at least half a point on this one.

You know I remember that it used to be that everything was closed on Sunday. No one rests anymore...and it shows!