Prots who ask “What’s the gospel?” are too ignorant to know that Catholics use the term “good news”, not “the gospel”—& for good reason: Prots can’t even agree on 1 definition of “the gospel”. Below are 65 various definitions of “the gospel”—each unique—from 65 different Prots.🧵 This is from the first: “Like so many Bible terms, the word “GOSPEL” has been given various definitions contrary to its original and proper meaning.”👇

media.thegospelcoalition.org/static-blogs/t…

Catholics need to know the “Bereans” story in Acts 17 because Prots CONSTANTLY distort it. 🧵

Paul taught the Bereans ORALLY that Jesus was the “Messiah” prophesied in the WRITTEN OT. They THEN checked Scripture, CONFIRMED IT, THEN accepted Paul’s ORAL teaching AS AUTHORITATIVE (Scripture PLUS Oral Teaching—like Catholics).

The Thessalonians REJECTED the ORAL teaching & stuck to “Scripture alone”—like Protestants.👇 DON’T let Prots twist this—read it for yourself. THAT the OT “Messiah” is the man “Jesus of Nazareth” is NOWHERE in the OT. Paul had to TELL them that—ORALLY. The Bereans THEN checked Scripture to see IF it made sense. By accepting Paul’s ORAL teaching, they WEREN’T being “Sola Scriptura”.👇

Actually, Penance is so “scriptural” it’s in both the Old AND the New Testaments:

• “But when you fast, anoint your head and wash your face, that your fasting may not be seen by men but by your Father who is in secret” (Matt. 6:17-18). 🧵 • “I pommel my body and subdue it, lest after preaching to others I myself should be disqualified” (1 Cor. 9:27).

• “And I will grant my two witnesses power to prophesy for 1,260 days, clothed in sackcloth” (Rev. 11:3).👇

He just trashed his own argument.

11 reasons why 1 Cor 4:6 has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with Sola Scriptura:

• Paul’s whole emphasis here is that the Corinthians were “arrogant” & “puffed up”. Sticking in the concept “Sola Scriptura” would have done NOTHING to address that.🧵 • “these things” refers to what Paul has ALREADY written “for YOUR sakes” in the previous chapters—NOT Sola Scriptura

• He could even be referring to his previous letter (Paul says in 1 Cor 5:9 he had written them a previous letter, now lost)👇

Get ready to hear his vacuous argument A LOT over the next 2 weeks. It’s a Prot favorite:

The Bible NEVER says “Call no man ‘FATHER’”—as a TITLE. It says “Call no man YOUR father”—as a DESCRIPTOR, our ultimate source of paternity. Jesus & Paul BOTH used “Father” as a TITLE: 🧵 • Jesus refers to “Father Abraham” (Luke 16:24)
• Paul: “For I became your [spiritual] father [~ a priest] in Christ Jesus through the Gospel.” (1 Cor 4:15)👇

The fact that he has to lie so childishly says a lot. 🤣

Catholics never “stripped out the second Commandment”.

This isn’t hard:

• Though Exodus 34:28 says there are “ten” commandments, they weren’t given numbers in the Bible.

• If you count the “thou shall nots” + the 2 commandments about keeping the Sabbath holy & honoring father & mother, you end up with 13.

• If you count anything that can be considered a “command”, you get 17+.

• So the numbering depends largely upon which “thou shall nots” you combine to get to 10.

• Since the First Commandment rightly begins in Exodus 20:2 (“I am the Lord thy God”) & stretches through part of verse 5 (up to “I am the Lord thy God”, again), Catholics correctly keep vv. 2-5 together—removing nothing—and that’s exactly how it appears in our Catechism.*

• Now, verses 3 & 5 make clear that this First Commandment doesn’t condemn making *any* statues (“the likeness of anything”); it’s condemning idolatry, in VIOLATION of “I am the Lord thy God”. That’s why they rightly belong, and are included, in the First Commandment.

• So Protestants lie when they say we “removed” the Second Commandment. We removed nothing. Abbreviated ‘pictures’/summaries obviously don’t count; Protestants’ pictures abbreviate their Second Commandment (“Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image”).**

• In sum: Catholics keep the First Commandment whole and entire (“I am the Lord thy God” being the bookends), & separate the last 2 Commandments, since obviously a neighbor’s wife is worth much more than a neighbor’s goods, and coveting a neighbor’s wife is a different Deadly Sin than coveting a neighbor’s goods (Lust vs. Envy). *The complete First Commandment, straight from the Catechism of the Catholic Church (which Protestants are too dishonest to check):

“I am the LORD your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage. You shall have no other gods before me. You shall not make for yourself a graven image, or any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth; you shall not bow down to them or serve them. It is written: ‘You shall worship the Lord your God and him only shall you serve.’” It ends right where verse 5 says again, “I am the Lord thy God.”

The Catholic Mass is ALL Scriptural. Those claiming otherwise don’t know Scripture.

Introductory Rites:
• Sign of the Cross (Matthew 28:19) - "In the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit."
• Greeting (2 Corinthians 13:14) - "The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, the love of God, and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit be with you all."
• Penitential Act (Confiteor, Kyrie, Lord Have Mercy) (Luke 18:13, Psalm 51:1-2) (Expressing repentance for sins).
• Gloria (Luke 2:14) - "Glory to God in the highest," echoing the song of the angels at Jesus' birth.👇 Liturgy of the Word:
• First Reading - From the Old Testament (except during Easter, when it's from Acts).
• Responsorial Psalm - Directly from the Psalms.
• Second Reading - From the New Testament Epistles.
• Gospel Acclamation (Alleluia) - John 6:68 ("Lord, to whom shall we go? You have the words of eternal life"), or, etc.
• Gospel Reading - directly from Matthew, Mark, Luke, or John.
• Homily - Based on the readings, reflecting on their meaning.
• Nicene Creed (1 Corinthians 15:3-7, John 1:1-14)👇

These Early Church Fathers believed in the real, Transubstantiated Presence of Christ in the Eucharist:
• Ignatius of Antioch, †107
• Justin Martyr, †165
• Irenaeus †202
• Tertullian, †240
• Hippolytus, Pope & martyr, †236
• Cyprian, †258
• Augustine, †430
Details🧵 J.N.D. Kelly, considered by many to be the greatest Early Church historian of the 20th Century, & whose work ‘Early Christian Doctrines’ is used as a textbook in Christian colleges & seminaries around the world, writes:👇

• Luther, Calvin, Zwingli, Protestantism’s founders, were ALL “Sola Scriptura”
• All believed in the Perpetual Virginity of Mary—& recognized it AS SCRIPTURAL
• Modern Prots—CLAIMING to be “Sola Scriptura”—deny it, saying it’s NOT Scriptural
• Sola Scriptura = pure hypocrisy

Catholics back up their doctrines. @FaithWithMase just stomps his foot.

15 reasons why PETER is the “Rock”, in order:

• Jesus spoke Aramaic.

• The Aramaic word for “rock” is “kepha”.

• So Jesus actually said, “You are “Kepha”, & upon this “kepha” I will build My Church.”

• You KNOW that because when Peter is referred to by his ACTUAL NAME in the NT he’s called “Kephas” (or “Cephas”): John 1:42, 1 Cor 1:12, 1 Cor 3:22, 1 Cor 9:5, 1 Cor 15:5, Gal 2:9 (KJV); + Gal 2:11, Gal 2:14 in Douay-Rheims.

• Matthew’s Gospel was originally written in Aramaic (see Sts. Papias & Irenaeus (2nd century) & Eusebius’ history).

• When (presumably) Matthew translated his Gospel → Greek, he knew his Greek readers might not know the word “kepha” MEANT “rock”. So to make the “rock” image clear, he used the Greek word for rock, “petra”: “upon this ‘petra’ I will build My Church.”

• “Petra” is feminine; Peter was a man. So Matthew had to take “petra" & masculinize it to “Petros” (-‘os’ = masculine ending). He HAS to use “petra” for rock so his Greek readers will understand; he CAN’T use the feminine “petra” for Peter’s name.

• The claim that “petra” means “rock” but “Petros” means “stone” was true in ATTIC Greek—NEVER in KOINE Greek, the Greek of the NT (entirely different dialect). In Koine Greek, both “petra” & “petros” meant “rock” (see next tweet).

• And by Jesus’ time, any distinction between “petra” & “Petros” had ceased to exist EVEN IN Attic Greek. Between the 8th & 4th centuries BC they were used as “rock” & “stone” in Attic Greek poetry, but that distinction had long disappeared by the time Matthew was translated into Greek (Koine Greek having become more popular it in the 4th century BC & continuing in widespread use until the 5th century AD). Greek scholars—even non-Catholic ones—admit the words “petra” & “petros” were synonyms in 1st century Greek (see next tweet).

• If Matthew had wanted Peter to mean “stone”, not “rock”, he would’ve used the Greek word for stone: “lithos”, or even clearer, “psephos”, which means “small stone” (e.g., Rev 2:17).

• Jesus uses the second-person personal pronoun “you” (singular) 7 times in these 3 verses. The context is clearly one of communicating a unique AUTHORITY to Peter here—& to Peter alone.

• Insisting on “stone” vs. “rock” is asserting that Jesus said, “Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jona! For flesh & blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father who is in heaven. And I tell you, *you are an insignificant stone*, & on this rock I will build my Church. I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven.” So what Jesus is ACTUALLY doing is giving Peter—the MAN, not his “faith”, not his “confession”—a 3-fold blessing:
1) “Blessed are you...”
2) “…upon this rock I will build…”
3) “I will give unto you the keys…”
What He is NOT doing is blessing him, then undermining that authority, then blessing him again.

• The “rock” obviously CANNOT be Christ because He’s the builder (“upon this rock I will build My Church.”). Christ, rather, is “the wise man who built his house upon the rock” (Matt 7:24)—the builder, the cornerstone, the foundation of the Faith—but Peter is His foundation for the Church.

• And you know that because (looking at the grammar) with “You are Kepha, AND upon this kepha”, “THIS kepha” must refer back to the closest noun. To say “this kepha” refers to Jesus, or to Peter’s “confession” 3 verses earlier, is to completely ignore the sentence’s structure. He DIDN’T say, “You are “Kepha”, BUT upon THIS [other] “kepha” I will build my Church.”👇 • Metaphors in the Bible have different meanings in different places:
→God is called “rock.”*
→Abraham is called “rock”**
→Jesus is called “the supernatural Rock”***
→Paul said, “I have laid the foundation [of FAITH, where he’d been—Christ having laid the foundation of the Church, Peter], & another buildeth thereon. For other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ.”****
But Paul refers here to Jesus as the foundation of the FAITH, which Paul advanced; Peter the “rock” is the foundation of the CHURCH.👇

They got it from the Bible:
• When Gabriel→Mary, she was married (then, the ‘betrothal’ WAS the marriage)
• His prophecy is ALL FUTURE TENSE: “thou SHALT conceive…”
• Mary asks, “How…?” Only a married woman WHO’D TAKEN A PERPETUAL VOW OF VIRGINITY would need to ask that.👇

https://twitter.com/patrick30887310/status/1825950816035045701

Gabriel places EVERYTHING he says prior to Mary’s response—& even after—in the future tense. The future tense is used seven times, & yet an already-married Mary asks “How” she is to get pregnant—AND BEFORE he gives ANY indication that the conception would be supernatural.👇

9 reasons how we know Jesus had no blood brothers:

• First, “brother” (Greek *adelphos*, plural *adelphoi*) can mean blood brothers, an extended relative, or just a fellow Christian. Just as Abraham & Lot were called “brothers” (Gen 14:14) when they were actually uncle & nephew, the “brethren” of Jesus (Matt 12:47) and the “brethren” of believers in 1 Corinthians 15:1 are both called *adelphoi*

• Using the etymology of *adelphos* (“from the same womb”) as its definition is literally called the “etymological fallacy”: misusing a term’s linguistic origin with its common usage (see next tweet)

• The Bible itself proves that “brother” in Scriptural & Semitic use is not only applied to blood brothers & step-brothers, but is often loosely extended to all near, or even distant, relatives (Gen. 13:8; 14:14, 16; Lev. 10:4; 1 Par. 15:5-10; 23:21, 22).

• James and Joseph are called Jesus’ “brothers” (Mark 6:3), but in the crucifixion accounts they had a different mother: “And there were also women looking on afar off: among whom was Mary Magdalen, and *Mary the mother of James the less and of Joseph*, and Salome.” (Mark 15:40)

• Comparing John 19:25 with Matt. 27:56 & Mark 15:40 (cf. Mark 15:47 & 16:1), we find that Mary of Clopas/Cleophas, called the sister of the Blessed Virgin (John 19:25), is the same as Mary the mother of James & Joseph.

• So regarding “James & Joseph & Simon & Jude”:
• James & Joseph are the sons of Mary, the wife of Clopas (Matthew 27:56, Mark 15:40, John 19:25);
• Simon, according to the second-century historian Hegesippus, was also a son of Clopas;
• and Jude identifies himself at the beginning of his letter as a “brother of James” (most likely the one one above, & therefore another son of Clopas). If he had been the blood brother of Jesus, he would’ve identified himself as such.

• These “brothers” are never once called the “children of Mary”, although Jesus Himself is (John 2:1; Acts 1:14).

• Throughout the New Testament, Mary appears as the “Mother of Jesus”—and of Jesus alone.

• No “brothers” are mentioned in the trip to Jersusalem when Christ was 12.

• At His death Jesus recommended His mother to St. John. There would be no reason to recommend her to an outsider if she had other sons, whether they believed in Him or not.

Bonus #1: Matthew 1:25: “And he did not know her until (Gr: *heos*) she brought forth her firstborn son.” “Until”in biblical times meant that some action did not happen up to a certain point. It did NOT imply that the action happened later. “Michal the daughter of Saul had no children until the day of her death” (2 Sam. 6:23) does NOT mean she had children after she was dead.

Bonus #2: Jesus being Mary’s “first-born” doesn’t mean there were other children that followed Him. For the ancient Jews “first-born” meant the child that opened the womb (Ex. 13:2; Num. 3:12). So, the first male child of a marriage was termed the “first-born” even if he turned out to be the only child. Bonus #3: Our tour guide in the Holy Land was a man born in Nazareth, raised in Nazareth, who lived in Nazareth, & ran his business from Nazareth. He said, “Anyone who claims that the word ‘brother’ in this part of the world, even 1000s of years ago, was EVER restricted to ‘blood brother’ simply doesn’t know what he’s talking about.”

• The photos in the next tweets show all the times the APOSTLES THEMSELVES referred to “the books the Catholics ADDED”.
• The Apostles didn’t use the Hebrew Scriptures, any more than they spoke Hebrew in conversation. They used the ‘Septuagint’, the Greek translation of the Hebrew Old Testament.
• In Jesus’ time it was a Greek-speaking world, so 72 Hebrew scholars—six from each of the Twelve Tribes of Israel—translated the OT into Greek.
• We know the Apostles used the Septuagint because Protestant authors Archer & Chirichigno list 340 times when the Apostles cite the Septuagint directly—but only 33 times when they cite the Hebrew (‘Masoretic Text’)(they can tell from the words/syntax)
• THE SEPTUAGINT CONTAINED ALL SEVEN BOOKS “the Catholics ADDED”.
• The Septuagint had become accepted as AUTHORITATIVE by the Jews of Alexandria and then by all Jews in Greek-speaking countries.
• Protestants claim that the Hebrew canon was “closed” at the time of Christ. But the Jews did not close their canon until the end of the first/early second centuries AD, well after the explosion of Christianity. At that point, given all of the above, especially the Apostles use of it, it didn’t matter what they thought—for obvious reasons.
• It’s obviously hypocritical to claim that ANY book of the Bible, if not quoted in the New Testament, doesn’t belong in the Old Testament, since “12 of the 39 protocanonical [accepted] books of the Old Testament remain without quotations in the New. These twelve are: Judges, Ruth, 2 Kings, Esther, Ezra, Nehemiah, Song of Songs, Ecclesiastes, Lamentations, Obadiah, Jonah, and Zephaniah.” (cf. Gleason Archer and C.G. Chirichigno, Old Testament Quotations in the New Testament: A Complete Survey, xvii). (Depending on who you read, some say anywhere from 7-12 books fit this category.) All the times the APOSTLES THEMSELVES referred to “the books the Catholics ADDED”. Keep scrolling down.

“Deuterocanonical References
in the New Testament” (Jimmy Akin)

cin.org/users/james/fi…

Feser (1): “Among the many reasons why capital punishment ought to be preserved, the *most fundamental* one is that for extremely heinous crimes, *no lesser punishment could possibly respect this Catholic principle that a punishment ought to be proportional to the offense*.”👇 Feser (2): “Put another way, to sentence killers like those described above to less than death would fail to do justice because the penalty – presumably a long period in prison – would be grossly disproportionate to the heinousness of the crime.”👇

St. Thomas Aquinas calls this very virtue Eutrapelia:

“Augustine says (Music. ii, 15): ‘I pray thee, spare thyself at times: for it becomes a wise man sometimes to relax the high pressure of his attention to work.’ Now this relaxation of the mind from work consists in 👇

https://twitter.com/ascent_of/status/1525543849753464833

“...playful words or deeds. Therefore it becomes a wise and virtuous man to have recourse to such things at times. Moreover the Philosopher [Ethic. ii, 7; iv, 8] assigns to games the virtue of eutrapelia.

Now just as weariness of the body is dispelled by resting the body, so👇

“I am Catholic, but I think majority opinion is what matters” means nothing other than “I don’t understand Catholicism.”

https://twitter.com/KirstenPowers/status/1521345901960343552

“The official teachings of the Catholic Church oppose all forms of abortion.”

“Since the 1st century, the Church has affirmed that every procured abortion is a moral evil, a teaching the Catechism of the Catholic Church declares ‘has not changed and remains unchangeable.’”👇

This (literal) heresy she’s espousing in that thread concerns the famous “Fundamental Option”. It perverts Augustine & was formally condemned by Pope Paul VI (who was no Trad): “Mortal sin does not consist only in resistance to the commandment of charity. It is equally found in👇

https://twitter.com/nelwyntoes/status/1516576301406162955

“...this opposition to authentic love which is included in *every deliberate transgression of each of the moral laws*.” Augustine’s statement “Love & do what you will” does NOT mean “I love God (subjectively defined) so I can do whatever I want (& it won’t be a sin).” It means👇

.@FrMatthewLC’s Never-Ending Lies—as a thread:

(1): You’d think after that first CFN article came out he’d stop telling lies—& yet, they persist. If you do nothing else, just read the 2nd paragraph (“Disclaimer”). It’ll tell you everything you’ll ever need to know about him:👇 catholicfamilynews.com/blog/2022/02/2…

@FrMatthewLC’s Never-Ending Lies (50): “Someone said recently that Fr. Matthew is never going to change. No one should expect him to. He’s already demonstrated repeatedly that:

•He doesn’t understand, or want to acknowledge, an accurate definition of Medical Testing.👇 •He doesn’t understand, or care, that the basic research he referenced is not Medical Testing.
•He doesn’t understand our moral premise against the vaccines.
•He doesn’t understand how clinics operate.
•He doesn’t understand what a hospital affiliation represents.👇

Decree of Pope Francis Confirming the Use of the 1962 Liturgical Books [for the FSSP]

Published 11 February 2022

“The Holy Father Francis, grants to each and every member of the Society of Apostolic Life “Fraternity of Saint Peter”, founded on July 18, 1988 and👇 “...declared of “Pontifical Right” by the Holy See, the faculty to celebrate the sacrifice of the Mass, and to carry out the sacraments and other sacred rites, as well as to fulfill the Divine Office, according to the typical editions of the liturgical books, namely the Missal,👇

“The Pope made it clear that institutes such as the FSSP are not affected by the general provisions of the Motu Proprio Traditionis Custodes, since the use of the ancient liturgical books was at the origin of their existence and is provided for in their constitutions.”👇 “...The Pope subsequently sent a decree signed by him and dated February 11, confirming for the members of the Fraternity the right to use the liturgical books in force in 1962, namely: the Missal, the Ritual, the Pontifical and the Roman Breviary.”