A Templar Doesn't Want Me to Be Catholic?

7 Orthodox Beliefs That Shock Protestants and Catholics
Ancient Faith Explained | 30 Aug. 2026
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M2gEh1xlkIE

Why the title "7 Orthodox Beliefs That Shock Protestants" isn't it enough?

If you were to rename the video, how about "7 Orthodox and Catholic Beliefs That Shock Protestants" ... or you document why Catholics are supposedly outside.

Marc Blaydoe

@mblaydoe

Because the video is not about Catholicism? Let the Catholics defend Catholicism. Does a video explaining Judaism have to explain why Catholicism is "outside"?

Note

OMSDT Knights :
https://www.usaknightstemplar.org/omsdt-knights

Grand Marshal, Marc Blaydoe, Knighted November 2018

Hans-Georg Lundahl

@hglundahl

@mblaydoe A Jewish video stating "Jewish beliefs that shock Atheists and Catholics" and enumerates "God created the world" as one of them or "God spoke to Moses on Sinai" as another of them would be equally lying (or mistaken) about Catholicism.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

@mblaydoe For the record, I am a Catholic defending Catholicism.

For the record. Templars were banned in 1313 and might be somewhat initiative in their "revival" version. Protecting pilgrims may, to them, involve making them reevaluate things, including the Catholic religion./HGL

Refuting a Protestant, Roughly (or closely or exactly, don't know) 7DA

What Does the Bible Say About the Pope? (And Why it Matters to Your Faith)
30 April 2025 | Becoming Christians
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=964t2wnJa64

2:23 That allegation is not in the Bible.

[The allegation that the papacy "as we know it today" is not in the Bible]

2:39 Suppose we grant the rock is Jesus.

Who receives the keys in next verse? "I will give thee the keys of the kingdom of Heaven" ... I suppose Jesus was not using "thee" for "myself", right?

Becoming Christians

@becomingchristians

You're absolutely right that in Matthew 16:19, Yahshua says, "I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven..."—and yes, He was speaking to Peter directly. But here’s where it gets interesting:

Receiving the keys doesn’t mean exclusive or supreme authority over the Church. In Jewish culture, keys represented the authority to open or close access—like a steward, not a king. Peter was entrusted with a special role: opening the doors of the Kingdom through the gospel. And that’s exactly what he did! In Acts 2, he preached to the Jews. In Acts 10, he brought the gospel to the Gentiles (Cornelius' household). That’s Peter using the keys.

But here’s the key part: that authority wasn't limited to Peter alone.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

@hglundahl

@becomingchristians "like a steward, not a king"

Exactly how we view the papacy.

However, in the physical or more precisely social absence of the king (not physically absent from the Eucharist, but also not usually talking from it), the steward exercises the powers of the King.

"that authority wasn't limited to Peter alone."

That's where we agree. He had successors too. Linus, Cletus, Clemens ...

Or wait, did you mean Matthew 18? Well, St. Peter had some equality with the others of the twelve. The Pope has some equality with the other bishops.

3:09 Here is a parallel verse about foundation:

Built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone:
[Ephesians 2:20]

However, the verse you cited, if you would like some context, here it is:

For we are God's coadjutors: you are God's husbandry; you are God's building According to the grace of God that is given to me, as a wise architect, I have laid the foundation; and another buildeth thereon. But let every man take heed how he buildeth thereupon For other foundation no man can lay, but that which is laid; which is Christ Jesus [1 Corinthians 3:9-11]

So we have learned two things from here about foundations:

• the only foundation is Christ Jesus
• nevertheless Apostles are laying it, it is not just Himself or the Father who's laying it, no, Apostles are in fact active as laying it ... which is what you find in Eph 2:20.

Becoming Christians

thanks for the additional insight

3:43 This is a historic allegation, contradicted by Church Tradition.

Here is St. Irenaeus:

Since, however, it would be very tedious, in such a volume as this, to reckon up the successions of all the Churches, we do put to confusion all those who, in whatever manner, whether by an evil self-pleasing, by vainglory, or by blindness and perverse opinion, assemble in unauthorized meetings; [we do this, I say,] by indicating that tradition derived from the apostles, of the very great, the very ancient, and universally known Church founded and organized at Rome by the two most glorious apostles, Peter and Paul; as also [by pointing out] the faith preached to men, which comes down to our time by means of the successions of the bishops. For it is a matter of necessity that every Church should agree with this Church, on account of its preeminent authority

The blessed apostles, then, having founded and built up the Church, committed into the hands of Linus the office of the episcopate. Of this Linus, Paul makes mention in the Epistles to Timothy. To him succeeded Anacletus; and after him, in the third place from the apostles, Clement was allotted the bishopric. This man, as he had seen the blessed apostles, and had been conversant with them, might be said to have the preaching of the apostles still echoing [in his ears], and their traditions before his eyes. Nor was he alone [in this], for there were many still remaining who had received instructions from the apostles. In the time of this Clement, no small dissension having occurred among the brethren at Corinth, the Church in Rome dispatched a most powerful letter to the Corinthians, exhorting them to peace, renewing their faith, and declaring the tradition which it had lately received from the apostles, proclaiming the one God, omnipotent, the Maker of heaven and earth, the Creator of man, who brought on the deluge, and called Abraham, who led the people from the land of Egypt, spoke with Moses, set forth the law, sent the prophets, and who has prepared fire for the devil and his angels. From this document, whosoever chooses to do so, may learn that He, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, was preached by the Churches, and may also understand the apostolic tradition of the Church, since this Epistle is of older date than these men who are now propagating falsehood, and who conjure into existence another god beyond the Creator and the Maker of all existing things. To this Clement there succeeded Evaristus. Alexander followed Evaristus; then, sixth from the apostles, Sixtus was appointed; after him, Telephorus, who was gloriously martyred; then Hyginus; after him, Pius; then after him, Anicetus. Soter having succeeded Anicetus, Eleutherius does now, in the twelfth place from the apostles, hold the inheritance of the episcopate. In this order, and by this succession, the ecclesiastical tradition from the apostles, and the preaching of the truth, have come down to us. And this is most abundant proof that there is one and the same vivifying faith, which has been preserved in the Church from the apostles until now, and handed down in truth.

Against Heresies (Book III, Chapter 3)
https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0103303.htm

4:12 You forget that it is Catholic doctrine that papal authority can take turns with collegial authority of a council.

By contrast, Peter in Acts 2 founded the Church in Jerusalem, and in Acts 8 together with John the Church in Samaria.

Becoming Christians

You're right that Catholic doctrine teaches a shared authority between the Pope and Church councils (collegiality), especially in ecumenical councils. However, what I addressed in the video is not just the shared structure, but the claim that the Pope holds supreme, universal, and infallible authority—a claim the Bible simply doesn’t support.

As for Peter in Acts 2, he certainly played a key role in preaching the first sermon at Pentecost. But nowhere in Scripture does it say he founded the Church in Jerusalem—if anything, James became the leading figure there (Acts 15:13-21). And in Acts 8, Peter and John went to confirm the work that was already started by Philip in Samaria—they didn't plant a new church.

The pattern we see in Acts and the New Testament isn’t of one supreme human leader, but of apostles and elders working together, always under the headship of Yahshua the Messiah.

No doubt, Peter was bold and faithful. But the Church was never built on Peter as a person—it was built on Christ and the confession of faith in Him (Matthew 16:16-18, 1 Corinthians 3:11).

Much love and blessings to you as we all keep seeking the truth in His Word!

Hans-Georg Lundahl

@becomingchristians "As for Peter in Acts 2, he certainly played a key role in preaching the first sermon at Pentecost."

Let me refresh your memory.

And they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and they began to speak with divers tongues, according as the Holy Ghost gave them to speak
[Acts Of Apostles 2:4]

But Peter standing up with the eleven, lifted up his voice, and spoke to them: Ye men of Judea, and all you that dwell in Jerusalem, be this known to you, and with your ears receive my words
[Acts Of Apostles 2:14]

The preaching of the 120 who had received the Holy Ghost was a sign, but indecisive.

The preaching of Peter was decisive.

5:02 Before you get from there to "no stand-ins" you need to skip a real lot.

"As the Father hath sent me, so I send you"
"He who heareth you heareth me, and him who hath sent me"

Jesus is the good shepherd and makes Peter the shepherd of his flock at lake Genesareth.

Becoming Christians

Hi! I have explained to you that Peter isn't the sole authority in the church.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

@becomingchristians And you claimed in so doing he was not in any way, shape or form a standin for Jesus.

I give the obvious counterexample.

5:16 If the words of a man, like Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, can be the words of God, and infallible, when that man is writing a Gospel, the words of a man, like Peter and Paul, Linus and Cletus and Clement, can be the words or decisions of God too.

Becoming Christians

What is the words of a man go against the established word of God?

Hans-Georg Lundahl

@becomingchristians You have to prove there are ways in which the words of the papacy have gone against the word of God.

However, if you do not show a pedigree back to the apostles, and pretend to be a Church, that in itself is against the word of God, like Matthew 28:16 through 20.

Fr. Jason Charron spoke

Why Antichrist Must Stop the Eucharistic Sacrifice
Fr. Jason Charron | 2 Sept. 2026
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kvtL9j43uM8

My Pope does not agree that the Missal of Paul VI is valid.

His name is Michael II, if you wish to correct me, take it up with him.

Apart from that, I have no beef with what you said.

I have stated that the Roman Caesar was "ho katekhon", I could argue that Christ in the Eucharist is rather "to katekhon" (bc thuma is Greek for hostia), but the function of a Christian Roman Caesar was anyway primarily to protect the worship of the Eucharist. So that's a quibble, not a beef.

Legalise Homeschooling? Good for AfD

@DWHistoryandCulture
Why is homeschooling illegal in Germany?
https://www.youtube.com/shorts/i5NCMiwJyec

Judges pretend that school is the place where children learn tolerance.

This also means it is the place where they learn or are exposed to intolerance, and sometimes of a degree they are not prepared to carry.

I Didn't Find St. Hilary Condemned Me

A Saint's Warning About False Prophets And Hypocrites
Return To Tradition | 30 Aug. 2026
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ST9e1GYhXzE

5:45 I'm noting a thing or two if someone would like to apply this to me, and judge me as one therein warned of.

Obeying the law of Christ.

But if they do not contain themselves, let them marry. For it is better to marry than to be burnt
[1 Corinthians 7:9]

I have done what I could to obey this and I'm being stopped.

Two. You mentioned false claims of knowing the future and presumably may have meant "date setting" ...

Hilary himself is known to have presumed the Antichrist was in preparation at the Court of Constantinople. In other words, he ventured a guess, no doubt an instructed guess, but nevertheless a guess, about when the world was ending. He was wrong, and nevertheless, he is St. Hilary.

In Lateran V, the ban on date setting, while referring to Matthew 24:36 or Mark 13:32, doesn't come in doctrinal context, but in disciplinary, namely in rules for preachers. No one says bloggers, vloggers or other essayists are bound by these.

So, if you try to get people not to widely read me, because you think me a "false claimant of knowledge" (which in this sermon wasn't even mentioned by St. Hilary), or because you think me a hypocrite, you are part of those who make it hard for me to actually start obeying God's law, including the cite from 1 Corinthians. This resumes both.

6:53 Today, it's very easy to get stamped as "pretending to be the only one who sees" ...

I yesterday claimed to see, not to the exclusion of everyone else, but of Uniformitarians, that Genesis 1 to 11 except the verses in chapters 1 and 2 prior to Adam's creation, have a very simple epistemology.

Heber saw Babel begin, after Noah died 350 after the Flood (using the martyrology reading for Christmas Day) and saw Babel end when his son Peleg was born 401 after the Flood. So, while he probably stayed away, and may have missed technical detail about whatever the "tower the top of which may reach into heaven" was meant to become ... I think Wernher von Braun did it ... he knew the general gist and arguably had a prophecy from which we have verses 5 to 7.

He died well after Sarug was born. Sarug died when Abraham was 50. Abraham probably started to write things down, given that a caravan leader had the capacity to dedicate a few camels to clay tablets or whatever and given that chapters from 12 on become more prolix, less easy to transmit by oral tradition.

Tell me exactly where this is in conflict with any dogma or traditional position of the faith, will you?

George Leo Haydock said pretty similar things on the epistemology of Genesis 3.

But possibly, you'll ignore this over X clergyman or Y expert or Z right winger telling you I'm a narcissist, and perhaps feeling yourself that an "attention seeker" or "clout chaser" should be ostracised. No need to put actual doctrine into whatever you think I'm doing wrong, since you have broadened the definition of what St. Hilary spoke of absurdly.

Catholicism Doesn't Have These Problems

Why A Rabbi Had to Solve an Impossible Space Problem
Judaism Unpacked | 27 Aug. 2026
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6uEs5rAkoeY

6:03 You have just solved a problem between Catholics and Orthodox.

Catholics. The Last Supper was a Seder, so Jesus used unleavened bread. See Synoptics.
Orthodox. No. The Seder was the evening after the Crucifixion, see John.

Solution? Jesus wasn't in Jerusalem when the temple decided to start Nisan that year and can have spotted the New Moon one day earlier than the Temple did. Once in Jerusalem, the Temple cut down communications up to those hostile ones after the Last Supper. All four Gospels are right and the Last Supper was a Seder.*

7:44 It's not Earth that rotates once every 24 hours minus some minutes, but OK.

Nevertheless, like the calendar by Hillel II, these problems were never in place from ...

It is a sabbath of rest, and you shall afflict your souls beginning on the ninth day of the month: from evening until evening you shall celebrate your sabbaths
[Leviticus 23:32]

... to Jesus replacing the old priesthood and the old law on Last Supper and Calvary.

Judaism having to deal with them is a sign that the kashrut of the Old Covenant are over.

In Catholicism, rules for when Sundays and Feast days set in and end may seem inappropriate to you, they go from evening to next midnight, unless the following day is a greater feast, while ordinary days go from midnight to midnight unless following day is a feast, but the point is, the New Testament is not prescribing a single way in the Bible text.**

---

* This was one reason for my return to Catholicism in 2009, another was that filioque doesn't start in Toledo III but is older. Filioque far older than III Council of Toledo

** As for the rules for fasting, unlike those for Ramadan: How Many Muslims Would Be OK With This?

Continuing with Sam Burns Who Seems Unaware of What Creationist Sites Actually Say

Assorted retorts from yahoo boards and elsewhere: AiG, Good on Flood Topic, Less Good on Soteriology · Continuing with Sam Burns Who Seems Unaware of What Creationist Sites Actually Say · New blog on the kid: Being a Young Earth Creationist is Not a Privilege I'm Asking For

Hans-Georg Lundahl

@samburns3329 Such as your proposal that the common YEC view on the Flood is waves were a mile high?

That proposal is evidence free, like it's evidence free to pretend a Geocentric (yours truly) is a Flat Earther. No, I'm not Rob Skiba II, even if I liked him for other reasons.

Sam Burns

@hglundahl There is no way to determine the actual height of waves in a mythical Flood which never happened. A mile high is a common claim made on YEC sites based on the claimed destruction the Flood supposedly wreaked.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

@samburns3329 A common claim made on YEC sites, as if you knew them better than I ...

Care to give an example?

On CMI one hit gives me this:

Total safety index, defined as the weighted average of three relative safety performances, showed that the Ark had a superior level of safety in high winds and waves compared with the other hull forms studied. The voyage limit of the Ark, estimated on the basis of modern passenger ships, criteria, revealed that it could have navigated through waves higher than 30 metres.

source
Safety investigation of Noah’s Ark in a seaway
By S.W. Hong, S.S. Na, B.S. Hyun, S.Y. Hong, D.S. Gong, K.J. Kang, S.H. Suh, K.H. Lee, and Y.G. Je
Published 28 Jan, 2006 | First appeared in Journal of Creation 8(1) Pages 26 - 36, April 1994
https://creation.com/en/articles/safety-investigation-of-noahs-ark-in-a-seaway

On AiG, I find this:

In fact, the 520 m tsunami height of the 1958 landslide quoted by ark skeptics took place within a narrow Alaskan bay where there was no time for the wave to develop a standard profile. This is not a deep-sea tsunami wave height.

The article, while referring to the same Korean Naval feasability or sea-worthiness study, refers to waves of 47 metres ... and that as being unlike the deep sea tsunamis.

A tsunami is caused by a sudden displacement of water. The most frequent cause is an underwater earthquake, but less frequently, tsunamis can be generated by volcanic eruptions, landslides, or even oceanic meteor impact. The length of these waves, from one crest to the next, can be up to 200 km long, and they travel in the deep ocean at speeds around 700 km/hr. Their height in the open ocean is very small, a couple of meters at most, so they pass under ships and boats undetected.

source:
Noah’s Ark: The Problem of Violent Waves
by Tim Lovett on August 9, 2024
https://answersingenesis.org/noahs-ark/noahs-ark-problem-violent-waves/

The mile high wave heights is not what you find on AiG or YEC, you are sure you weren't consulting an ANTI-YEC site?

Sam Burns

[first answered with an insult and with asking for the evidence for the Flood instead of continuing the objection. But to the exchange, as my answer is now visible]

Sam Burns

@hglundahl You're still just urinating into the wind since you still have zero evidence the mythological Flood ever happened. 😄

Hans-Georg Lundahl

@samburns3329 You forget you by now have zero evidence that the waves would have made it impossible, which makes the Flood account perfectly capable of being what it has purported to be, a historical account.

Other thread

Hans-Georg Lundahl

@samburns3329 You did not give any reason for any of the three to be impossible to be formed during a one year Flood, so you gave no "three examples" worth my while.

Luminiscence? There is a question of when Mungo "man" is from. The luminiscence involving sand around him (or her) says 40 000 BP. BUT the bones themselves are more in the 20 000 range, as dated by Carbon 14. So, carbon 14 would be more reliable on my evaluation than luminiscence.

You mentioned argon argon dating. I looked it up:

The 40Ar/39Ar method only measures relative dates. In order for an age to be calculated by the 40Ar/39Ar technique, the J parameter must be determined by irradiating the unknown sample along with a sample of known age for a standard. Because this (primary) standard ultimately cannot be determined by 40Ar/39Ar, it must be first determined by another dating method. The method most commonly used to date the primary standard is the conventional K/Ar technique.

It so happens, K/Ar can be skewed by lava solidifying quickly because of lots of cold water, as in the Flood. Here is another thing, you attributed its use to "archaeologists" ... but that's a different chapter from palaeontology. Now, again from the Ar/Ar article:

One problem with argon–argon dating has been a slight discrepancy with other methods of dating.[3] Work by Kuiper et al. reports that a correction of 0.65% is needed.[4] Thus the Cretaceous–Paleogene extinction (when the dinosaurs died out)—previously dated at 65.0 or 65.5 million years ago—is more accurately dated to 66.0–66.1 Ma.

source:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argon-argon_dating

That's palaeontology and definitely within the scope of Flood geology, unlike much of Carbon 14.

Try again.

Sam Burns

@hglundahl LOL! I love the way you just yell NUH-UH! while still dodging the geologic formations you can't explain were caused in one year by a Flood. 😄 Also the way you C&Ped the usual creationist excuses for dodging the multiple independent and consilient dating methods.

Sam Burns

@hglundahl Is this example "worth your while"?

1) In the Pacific Northwest is a geologic feature called the Columbia River Basalt Group. It's a huge lava flow area covering most of eastern Oregon and Washington, western Idaho and part of norther Nevada. Geologists have identified over 350 separate volcanic lava flows which K/Ar and Ar40/Ar39 show occurred from 16.7 MYA to 5.5 MYA.
2) To add to creationist problems we have the Grande Ronde River which flows some 200 miles across the same Columbia basalt fields in Oregon and Washington State. The Grande Ronde makes S-shaped meanders and has downcut basalt cliffs some 3000 ft. tall.

Questions for you:
1. If the Columbia Basalt fields all formed in one year why do they date so differently over an 11 million year span? Don't just yell "bad assumptions". Explain why all the dates are different.
2. How did the Grande Ronde River form? The usual excuse "the rocks were soft" doesn't work because soft basalt is molten lava. 😮

Hans-Georg Lundahl

@samburns3329 "while still dodging the geologic formations you can't explain were caused in one year by a Flood."

Prior to this example, you weren't giving any evidence against within one single year.

Now, the 11 million year span has to do with K/Ar dating.

I'll cite an article by CMI, which deals with this exact formation, including the River.

I'll just answer on the 11 million years:

They do not, by themselves, give unambiguous information about the cooling rate of the lavas. However, entablatures can solidify and cool very rapidly by water-steam convection.

source:
Field studies in the Columbia River basalt, Northwest USA
By John Woodmorappe and amp; Michael J. Oard
Published 28 Jan, 2006 | First appeared in Journal of Creation 16(1) Pages 103 - 110, April 2002
https://creation.com/en/articles/field-studies-in-the-columbia-river-basalt-northwest-usa

This means, the lava cooled at different rates, and earlier flows during the Flood cooled quicker and therefore more Argon was trapped lower down.

For other solutions, the article I quoted is Field studies in the Columbia River basalt, Northwest USA.

CMI, as I mentioned.

Sam Burns

@hglundahl Keep lying and dodging. You're really making a case for creationism! 😅😅😅 How did the Flood form the Grande Ronde River in molten lava?

@hglundahl Here's an example you won't be able to C&P the usual creationist lies over.

In Northern California, Tuolumne County is a geologic feature called the Stanislaus Table Mountain. Its formation began 10.4 MYA with a volcanic eruption from the Little Walker volcanic center near Sonora pass. The eruption produce a large lahar (mud, ash, lava mixture) which flowed down for some 80 miles and filled in an existing river channel. Over time the lahar hardened into stone and the land forming the original river banks eroded away. What is left is an inverted 3-D cast of the original river. It's over 1000 ft. high, 1000 ft. wide at its widest point and some 80 miles long. I can't post photos but do a quick search - it's an amazing sight from the air.

I defy you to provide a reasonable explanation for how this feature could have formed in a one year Flood only 4500 years ago.

@hglundahl This means, the lava cooled at different rates, and earlier flows during the Flood cooled quicker and therefore more Argon was trapped lower down. I couldn't let this lie slide. Did all these eruptions happen before the Flood waters covered everything or did they happen under the Flood waters? In either scenario your hand-waving excuse doesn't work. 😅

Hans-Georg Lundahl

@samburns3329 "How did the Flood form the Grande Ronde River in molten lava?"

Referring you to the article, as given.

River formation are not my even amateurish expertise.

"Did all these eruptions happen before the Flood waters covered everything or did they happen under the Flood waters?"

They happened while water was rising and therefore different parts were covered and different ones weren't.

But arguably they happened under water and were cooled by different heights of water above them.

This one I actually found no CMI article on:

"The eruption produce a large lahar (mud, ash, lava mixture) which flowed down for some 80 miles and filled in an existing river channel. Over time the lahar hardened into stone and the land forming the original river banks eroded away. What is left is an inverted 3-D cast of the original river."

The lahar hardened very quickly as waters cooled it, which also eroded the surrounding land.

CMI had

an article on lahars and pyroclastic mud flows, though:

The Pinatubo eruption—catastrophic pyroclastic flows and lahars
By Andrew Sibley
Published 05 Nov, 2021 | First appeared in Journal of Creation 34(2) Pages 5 - 7, August 2020
https://creation.com/en/articles/pinatubo-eruption

Probably applicable to Table Mountain (Tuolumne County, California) too.

Sam Burns

@hglundahl LOL! As expected if you can't C&P some ready made creationist lie you're totally lost. 😄😄😄 You clowns are too funny!

@hglundahl Now that you've established you know nothing about geology or dating methodology or ocean waves or wooden ships, what else do you want to talk about?

Hans-Georg Lundahl

@samburns3329 You have just established that you are out of your depth, resort to insults and laugh when you don't know what to answer.

With you, I might not want to talk of much else.

(Nevertheless, I gave him a link to the two parts)