Muslim’s Defense of Islam damaged itself

This video by David Wood demonstrates how Muslim “apologists” (those that give Da’wa and defense of Islam) really failed in 2020 and damaged their own religion. This video is a synopsis of major things that happened in response to Dr. Yasir Qadhi’s confession that there are “holes in the narrative” that most Muslims believe and say – “that the Qur’an is perfectly preserved down to the letter” – that all Arabic Qur’ans are exactly the same. One of the most revealing clips is of Ali Da’wa who boasts about Sharia law and the Islamic punishment for apostasy – death – in Islamic lands. (like Saudi Arabia, Iran, Taliban Afghanistan, and other Muslim countries and areas, but applied in varying degrees and circumstances.) If they had unity and one Ummah (one “nation”, “community” under one political Caliph, again, there is no doubt that they would carry this Islamic law out. And if the Muslim world had that unity, and a Caliph again (successor to Muhammad on earth), then they would start aggressive Jihad against the West, Israel, Buddhist and Hindu areas, again, just as they did in history. (along with Sharia law principles and Dhimmi principles). This demonstrates Islam is a war-like conquering religion at root and principle, a political and military and social agenda, with its purpose to conquer the world. It is evil and wrong at root.

Someone has written an article of reasons to not convert to Islam, and some of them are not as strong as others, most of these reasons demonstrate how Islam is wrong and not credible and is a brutal and war-like religion, and contradicts the NT (The True Injeel), and yet claims to confirm the previous Scriptures of true Monotheism. (Surah 3:2-3; 5:47; 5:68; 10:94).

Below (clay stop motion rats animation) is a humorous, (but at the same time very dangerous and serious) video in typical British Monty Python type style, using clay motion stop action animation – It is humorous but at the same time very dangerous and serious, as it shows the Muslim Ali Dawah’s belief that apostates should be killed for leaving the religion of Islam. (see the real Ali Dawa in the above David Wood video). (Most Muslims would have to agree with this, doctrinally and historically, because of Islamic texts and history and jurisprudence); although those in the west are quiet about this fact of their religion; and probably many Muslims do not hold to this belief anymore. But it is taught clearly in Hadith passages.

“If anyone leaves his Islamic religion, kill him.” (see the documentation)

In the Hadith of Sahih Al-Bukhari, the most trusted of all the standard Muslim Hadith collections:

Narrated `Ikrima:

Some Zanadiqa (atheists) were brought to `Ali and he burnt them. The news of this event, reached Ibn `Abbas who said, “If I had been in his place, I would not have burnt them, as Allah’s Messenger (ﷺ) forbade it, saying, ‘Do not punish anybody with Allah’s punishment (fire).’ I would have killed them according to the statement of Allah’s Messenger (ﷺ), ‘Whoever changed his Islamic religion, then kill him.'”

Reference : Sahih al-Bukhari 6922
In-book reference : Book 88, Hadith 5
USC-MSA web (English) reference : Vol. 9, Book 84, Hadith 57

Ali Dawah said that this is only for Muslim lands, under an Islamic State – because Apostates “spread corruption in the land”. But he says he is proud of that rule. Many in history interpret “fitna” (confusion, turmoil, chaos, rebellion in the streets, mutiny) as a reason for killing also. (Surah 8:39) but they also agree that they would have to have a proper Caliph again and unity over who is the next Caliph. One problem is that they do not have unity and do not have a Caliph (successor to Muhammad on earth, since Mustapha Kemal Ataturk abolished the last Ottoman Caliphate in 1924)

What is the meaning of the rats eating inside of the Qur’an? Is there an intended meaning to that or is it just some ADD random type humor?

Maybe the rats eating inside the Qur’an mean that the Qur’an is corrupt. Paul Williams also linked to this video at his web-site, “Blogging Theology”, and appeared for several months to claim that he was no longer a Muslim. see here on Paul Williams putting up the rat clay stop motion animation. But his recent You Tube channel seems to indicate that he is back to Islam. Paul Williams has gone back and forth, it seems 5-6 times over the past few years, since 2014 (?).

Posted in Apologetics, Islam, Muslim scholar, Muslims, Paul Bilal Williams | Leave a comment

Praying to dead saints, icons, relics

Most of Jordan Cooper’s videos are very good (I just disagree with him on Baptism and his views against Reformed theology, but on other historical theology and church history issues, and justification by faith alone, he is great!) Especially this one about prayer to the saints who have died and the early church fathers. The Quotes from Martin Chemnitz (Lutheran theologian, historian, who came after Martin Luther and wrote extensively on the Council of Trent – 1545-1563); and early church fathers such as Epiphanius, Athanasius, Chrysostom, and Augustine, are especially good.

But if it belong to none other than God to bless and to deliver, and none other was the deliverer of Jacob than the Lord Himself and Him that delivered him the Patriarch besought for his grandsons, evidently none other did he join to God in his prayer, than God’s Word, whom therefore he called Angel, because it is He alone who reveals the Father. Which the Apostle also did when he said, ‘Grace unto you and peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ’ For thus the blessing was secure, because of the Son’s indivisibility from the Father, and for that the grace given by Them is one and the same. For though the Father gives it, through the Son is the gift; and though the Son be said to vouchsafe it, it is the Father who supplies it through and in the Son; for ‘I thank my God,’ says the Apostle writing to the Corinthians, ‘always on your behalf, for the grace of God which is given you in Christ Jesus’ And this one may see in the instance of light and radiance; for what the light enlightens, that the radiance irradiates; and what the radiance irradiates, from the light is its enlightenment. So also when the Son is beheld, so is the Father, for He is the Father’s radiance; and thus the Father and the Son are one.

Athanasius, Discourse Against the Arians, 3, 25, 13

Listen to Dr. Jordan Cooper’s analysis of the context in Athanasius. The context shows that the “Angel” who reveals Himself in the OT is many times, pre-incarnational manifestations of Jesus Christ Himself. Notice the phrases, “it belongs to none other than God to bless and to deliver” and “none other did he join to God in his prayer”.

This demonstrates that the Roman Catholic rosary is wrong, because it mixes prayers to God with prayers to Mary, thus violating the principle that Athansius so clearly communicates. Don’t pray to dead saints, even though they are alive in heaven.

23. Moreover if, as the heretics hold, the Son were creature or work, but not as one of the creatures, because of His excelling them in glory, it were natural that Scripture should describe and display Him by a comparison in His favour with the other works; for instance, that it should say that He is greater than Archangels, and more honourable than the Thrones, and both brighter than sun and moon, and greater than the heavens. But he is not in fact thus referred to; but the Father shews Him to be His own proper and only Son, saying, ‘Thou art My Son,’ and ‘This is My beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.2348’ Accordingly the Angels ministered unto Him, as being one beyond themselves; and they worship Him, not as being greater in glory, but as being some one beyond all the creatures, and beyond themselves, and alone the Father’s proper Son according to essence2349. For if He was worshipped as excelling them in glory, each of things subservient ought to worship what excels itself. But this is not the case2350; for creature does not worship creature, but servant Lord, and creature God. Thus Peter the Apostle hinders Cornelius who would worship him, saying, ‘I myself also am a man2351.’ And an Angel, when John would worship him in the Apocalypse, hinders him, saying, ‘See thou do it not; for I am thy fellow-servant, and of thy brethren the Prophets, and of them that keep the sayings of this book: worship God2352.’ Therefore to God alone appertains worship, and this the very Angels know, that though they excel other beings in glory, yet they are all creatures and not to be worshipped2353, but worship the Lord. Thus Manoah, the father of 361Samson, wishing to offer sacrifice to the Angel, was thereupon hindered by him, saying, ‘Offer not to me, but to God2354.’ On the other hand, the Lord is worshipped even by the Angels; for it is written, ‘Let all the Angels of God worship Him2355;’ and by all the Gentiles, as Isaiah says, ‘The labour of Egypt and merchandize of Ethiopia and of the Sabeans, men of stature, shall come over unto thee, and they shall be thy servants;’ and then, ‘they shall fall down unto thee, and shall make supplication unto thee, saying, Surely God is in thee, and there is none else, there is no God2356.’ And He accepts His disciples’ worship, and certifies them who He is, saying, ‘Call ye Me not Lord and Master? and ye say well, for so I am.’ And when Thomas said to Him, ‘My Lord and my God2357,’ He allows his words, or rather accepts him instead of hindering him. For He is, as the other Prophets declare, and David says in the Psalm, ‘the Lord of hosts, the Lord of Sabaoth,’ which is interpreted, ‘the Lord of Armies,’ and God True and Almighty, though the Arians burst2358 at the tidings.

Athanasius, Discourse Against the Arians, 2, 16, 23

Athanasius demonstrates through quoting Scripture and argumentation that we should not be bowing down to humans or statues or venerating icons or relics. bowing down with worship = “do not do that”. Worship God alone. See also Revelation 19:10 and 22:8-9. Therefore, bowing and kissing images, icons, statues and praying to Mary or other dead saints is wrong.

I hope to add more commentary to this over time. For more references and discussions of these things and related issues (icons, images, relics, praying to dead saints), see the videos by Gavin Ortlund also on prayer to the saints, and also on icons and relics; and see the debate that James White had with Patrick Madrid on prayers to saints and the issue of latria (worship, adoration) vs. dulia (respect, honor, veneration) and hyper-dulia (special higher honor given to Mary, the mother of Jesus).

Venerating Icons, by Gavin Ortlund

Dr. White’s debate vs. Patrick Madrid

Relics, by Gavin Ortlund

Posted in Apologetics, early church history, Eastern Orthodoxy, Icons and relics, Prayers to Mary, Roman Catholic False Doctrines, Roman Catholic false practices, Roman Catholicism | Leave a comment

The cure for Depression & Despair – the Living God Himself!

“O send out Your light and Your truth, let them lead me;Let them bring me to Your holy hillAnd to Your dwelling places.Then I will go to the altar of God,To God my exceeding joy;And upon the lyre I shall praise You, O God, my God.”

Psalm 43:3-4

This is the solution to the depression and discouragement & despair of this world, the Psalmist feels in Psalm 42-43. These 2 Psalms go together. He asks several times, “Why are you in despair, O my soul?”(Ps. 42:5, 9, 11; 43:5) “Hope in God” – he tells his soul to hope in God.

Our responsibility and part is to cry out in prayer for God to send out His light (revelation, insight into the Word as we read, meditate, pray over, study, obey)

in 43:3-4 he asks / prays to God to send out His light and Truth and for guidance to lead him to worship the Lord, his exceeding joy.”

“to God, my exceeding joy” Meditate on that phrase. The Living God, the God of the Bible is our exceeding joy.

then I will go the altar” = the altar of sacrifice (OT context) and confession of sins. For us in the New Covenant, confession and remembering the once for all sacrifice of Christ and celebration of the Lord’s Supper with God’s people in church. Then, sing with joy and praise to God, the Living God.Song by Phil Keaggy (1981), based on those verses:

Posted in Depression and Suicide, Music, Sanctification/Holy living, Spiritual growth, Spiritual songs, worship | Leave a comment

John 1:1

“In the beginning was the Word,and the Word was with God,and the Word was God. “ John 1:1

If one only has a beginning knowledge of Greek, it can be very dangerous. The grammar and Greek syntax of John 1:1 determines the right theology. The doctrine of the Deity of Christ and the eternality of the Son is based on Scripture, not the Council of Nicaea. The Council of Nicaea is good and right on the Deity of Christ and His eternality and being the same substance as the Father ( homo-ousias) because it was based on Scripture, and derives secondary authority from the only infallible authority – the Scriptures.

In John 1:1, the predicate nominative issue is the key interpretive issue, more important than the definite article issue. The third clause and predicate nominative issue:

“and the Word was God. “καὶ θεὸς ἦν ὁ λόγος.

literal word order: “And God was the Word. ”Daniel Wallace has an excellent comment on the Greek grammar of these issues:

“We know that “the Word” is the subject because it has the definite article, and we translate it accordingly: “and the Word was God.” Two questions, both of them of theological import, should come to mind: 1) Why was θεὸς (Theos) thrown forward? And 2) why does it lack the article? In brief, its emphatic position stresses its essence or quality: “What God was, the Word was” is how one translation brings out this force. It’s lack of a definite article keeps us from identifying the person of the Word (Jesus Christ) with the person of “God” (the Father). That is to say, the word order tells us that Jesus Christ has all the divine attributes that the Father has; lack of the article tells us that Jesus Christ is not the Father. John’s wording here is beautifully compact! It is, in fact, one of the most elegantly terse theological statements one could ever find. As Martin Luther said, the lack of an article is against Sabellianism [Modalism]; the word order is against Arianism. To state it another way, look at how the different Greek constructions would be rendered:

καὶ ὁ λόγος ἦν ὁ θεὸς = “and the Word was the God” ( ie, the Father, Sabellianism, [or Modalism] – if God had had the definite article, “the”)

καὶ ὁ λόγος ἦν θεὸς = “and the Word was a god” (Arianism) [also Jehovah’s Witness theology]

καὶ θεὸς ἦν ὁ λόγος “and the Word was God” (orthodoxy) [sound, Biblical doctrine)

Jesus Christ is God by nature/substance/essence, and has all the attributes that the Father has. But He is not the first person of the Trinity. [the Son is not the Father] All this is concisely affirmed in

καὶ θεὸς ἦν ὁ λόγος. “ cited in Basics of Biblical Greek, William D. Mounce, Zondervan, 1993, p. 28-29. (Quoting Daniel Wallace, see below)

(Daniel Wallace goes much more in depth on John 1:1 in respect to the grammatical issues discussed here, in his Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics, pages 41, 257-259 and 266-269.

So, the Greek Grammar determines the right interpretation and the right theology. Jesus is the eternal Word, the same substance as the Father, but a different person (the Son), in an eternal relationship with the Father. Demonstrates that Arianism of the 4th Century was false, and the Jehovah’s Witnesses are false, Unitarianism is false, Judaism is false, and Islam and every other religion and philosophy that denies the Deity of Christ, is false.

Posted in Apologetics, Deity of Christ, Greek, Islam, John 1:1, Muslims, Nicea, Theology of God, Truth | Comments Off on John 1:1

Anthony Rogers decimates Sam Shamoun & William Albrecht, Again!

Anthony Rogers preaches the gospel here from Romans and Galatians. Shows how the churches in Galatia had forsaken the gospel, they even turned away from Christ Himself.

Anthony provides an interesting insight in that the letter to the Galatians says, “to the churches” (v, 2) and yet all other epistles say “the church of God” or “those who are faithful” or “to the saints” at various places.

“I am amazed that you are so quickly deserting Him who called you by the grace of Christ, for a different gospel . . . ” Galatians 1:6

Adding works to justification is deserting Jesus Himself, for a different gospel.

It is possible for local churches, in history, even apostolic churches, to leave the faith. Galatians 1:6

The church at Ephesus also had “left their first love” (Rev. 2:4) and God eventually took their lamp stands away by allowing Islam to invade and conquer. (Rev. 2:5)

The Churches in North Africa left the faith after Augustine died (430 AD) and the Vandals came and brought Arianism into the area – later 400s to 600s. Then Islam came and wiped out the churches, but they had already left the faith. The Coptic Church survived in Egypt because they held onto the Deity of Christ and the Trinity. I met an interesting group of Coptic Evangelicals when I was in Egypt in 1986. Great group of people!

“another generation was raised up that did not know the Lord” (see Judges 2:10)

How does this relate to Jesus’ promise in Matthew 16:18? “I will build My church, and the gates of Hades will not prevail against it.”

The promise is for all true believers, the Universal church of Christ – believers from all nations (Rev. 5:9; 7:9) and in all generations (Ephesians 3:21). The “gates of Hades” means “death” – it does not mean that a church cannot become apostate by false teaching, liberalism, etc. True believers have eternal life, peace with God, the promise of heaven. several times in the book of Revelation, it says, “the one who overcomes will not be hurt by the second death” (Rev. 2:11; see also Rev. 20:6; 20:14; 21:18) and “everyone whose name was not found in the book of life was thrown into the lake of fire. This is the second death. (see Revelation 20:10-15)

But all churches in the west who are liberal, apostate, those that deny the Virginal conception of Christ in the womb of Mary, who deny the Deity of Christ, or the resurrection of Christ from the dead, or if they think homosexuality is ok and affirm that sin and/ or so called “same sex marriage” – all of these have left the faith. They may have church buildings, but they don’t have the faith. As Athanasius said to the believers who were kicked out of their church buildings because of the Arian heresy: “they have the buildings, but you have the faith”. (Festal letter fragment 29)

The buildings in Rome, full of pomp and gold, and all around the world, full of priests who teach false doctrines and man-made traditions, full of statues of Mary (idols), full of bread in a little tabernacle that they think is the flesh of Jesus, full of priests with special clothes and rituals and so called ex opere operato powers, etc. are empty shells of false churches. They have buildings, but not the faith. The Roman Catholic Church became a false church at the Council of Trent, 1545-1563, because of all the anathemas, especially the one against the doctrine of justification by faith alone.

Sam Shamoun prays lots of mantras now, formulas, repetitive ritualistic prayers, making the sign of the cross (nothing wrong with that per se; but using it as a mechanical ritual is a problem), asking God to help him overcome his pride and anger, yet 2 seconds later curses people out that disagree with him. He calls people names all the time; he talks dirty. He curses Muslims, and Jews, and anyone who disagrees with him, who are created in the image of God. Sam, you are not a prophet nor an apostle!

“with our tongue, we bless God our creator, but curse mankind, who is created in the image of God” – James 3:9-10

With the tongue we praise our Lord and Father, and with it we curse human beings, who have been made in God’s likeness. 10 Out of the same mouth come praise and cursing. My brothers and sisters, this should not be. James 3:9-10

Sam:

“Not many of you should become teachers, my fellow believers, because you know that we who teach will be judged more strictly. We all stumble in many ways. Anyone who is never at fault in what they say is perfect, able to keep their whole body in check.” James 3:1-2

Repent!

You need to repent and come back to the true gospel and repent of your wrong behavior towards Muslims, Jews, and people who disagree with you.

at the 2:00 hour mark, Anthony makes a great point that the faith + works righteousness religions (especially Roman Catholicism) often criticize us who believe in justification by faith alone (but true faith does not stay alone); and yet Sam Shamoun (and his followers, by their silence or fear of confronting him in his obvious sinful anger and ugly behavior) is committing the most un-sanctified and wicked behavior toward others by his mouth and cursing and sinful anger and yet those ritual churches are the ones who complain that they think we don’t believe in good works also and sanctification and right behavior! Touche Anthony Rogers!

By being quiet and by being afraid to confront Sam, you others who support him and involved in the same sins!

Sam likes to call people cowards and sissies and effeminate, etc. and uses bullying tactics. But when I called into his show he blocked me after I told him that I pray for him. And I do and still do. I do pray for you, Sam!

Sam, it is you who are the coward and sissy because you hung on me and would not face me!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8jaHr4o1ShY&t=2982s


Your video, “Open Skype, Tovia Singer, Paul Williams, & Ken Temple
starts around the 42 minute mark
After having some technical sound difficulties . . . 
You asked:Sam: “So, Ken, Can you explain to us why you are such a Rabid Dog?  (about 42:45)
A stupid question; no substance
“Your mics not working Ken, don’t be scared.”
Me:  “I am not scared.”
Sam:  “because you are such an arrogant dog you think I took the video down because down inside I know that you are right”
“how stupid do you feel that you are an arrogant twit that you think you are Christlike?”
another stupid question of no substance
I laughed
“you gunna keep laughing and waste my time?”
Me: “yeah, anyway I just wanted to face you and say that I  do pray for you . . . “
then you cut me off
I came on to your show, and faced you; so it is you who is the sissy and baby and you are the coward because you did not even give me a chance to talk or spend much time on the issue.
My point is that you took down the Tovia Singer video because you were cursing him and name calling him, and that is wrong.  It does not matter that Jai did not do it right.  You were caught sinning against an unbeliever. You even said that you took it down because you have the clean up the mess that Jai left.

But if you are a prophet or an apostle, and you claim it is ok to curse people the way you do, why did you take it down?

Also, you doubled down on that principle recently, cursing and getting angry and gave Vocab Malone more and more clips to use. If you were not afraid to put that out, then why did you take the Tovia Singer clip down?

Because deep down, you know I am right about this. The NT says “do not return evil for evil”.


You don’t know how to interact with people.  

Sam – You did not even give me a chance to answer.  You don’t know how to socially relate to people normally.  All you do is use bullying tactics.  Your 2 little questions had no substance (I went back and listened again), and both full of insults and arrogance and sinful anger and bravado and pugnaciousness (which disqualifies you from ministry – 1 Timothy 3:2-4) (you violate many of the qualifications, “above reproach”, etc. along with “respectable” and self-controlled”, etc. KJV – “not a striker)-  brother Sam, meditate on the passages about qualifications for ministry. Meditate on James 3:1-18 and 4:1-10 – “with your tongue you bless God” (in your ritualistic and repetitive prayers on your show), then one second later, “and with you also curse men” people (mankind, humans) who are made in the likeness of God”  (James 3:9-10)  Also, you were too busy reading Jack Chick tracts and being discipled in shallow Evangelical churches (no telling how many you bounced around from because of your bullying and anger and inability to relate to people in a proper way.  You even turn on your own mods and friends in your channel constantly.  You already got rid of many; those that are left are afraid of you; or they are from the ritualistic churches hoping that you are going to join them soon.  They are not “apostolic” although they claim to be, because they have added things that are man-made traditions and practices and ritualistic dead religion.  (statues, icons, trafficking in relics, emphasis on rituals and ceremonies, unBiblical doctrines and dogmas, etc.) 
You hung up on me because deep down, you know I was right by the way you cursed an unbeliever (Tovia Singer), calling him names, and the proof was there for all to see but you took it down. You sissy baby; you coward; why didn’t you leave it up if you are so tough and manly, huh? Why didn’t you leave it up if you are a prophet or acting in an apostolic way with unbelievers?  If it was godly character like the prophets or the apostle Paul or like Jesus calling the Pharisees snakes, etc. why were you afraid to leave it up?  huh?  It was up for all to see and hear your behavior.  It does not matter that Jai cut the quote too soon; you sinned and no wonder no wants to debate you anymore.  (for a long time) The Muslims and Jews like Tovia Singer can easily say that your anger and sin and bullying and bravado and pugnaciousness disqualify you from debating – so they ALL ignore you, and you need to repent of all that sin and return to a Biblical church that can counsel you and disciple properly as you deal with the bad habits you have trained your personality into to this day.  You give them reason to blaspheme our great God and Savior, Jesus Christ.  “because of you, the unbelievers / pagans blaspheme” (Romans 2:24; Isaiah 52:5; Ezekiel 36:20) Michael Brown does not do what you do. David Wood does not do what you do.  They are respectable.  (even Robert Sungenis and William Albrecht does not do what you do!) You even admitted this to Robert Sungenis.  Be ashamed of yourself. Repent. Mourn.  Read the book, “The Doctrine of Repentance” by Thomas Watson. Ritual prayers and crossing yourself won’t help you.  (nothing wrong with crossing yourself in the name of The Trinity, in itself, but you and those before you, in history turned it into a dead ritual that many do; without the power of the Holy Spirit.  There is no power in dead repetitive ritualistic prayers or physical motions or the right words in formalistic prayers. I have prayed for you and still do that God will bring you to repentance.  What you do (sinful anger, bullying, pugnacious spirit, insulting, cursing, lack of patience) is not glorifying to the Lord Jesus Christ.  You have lots of knowledge, but no power or character, and no love. (1 Corinthians 8:1; James 3:1-18; 4:1-6) 
I faced you after you taunted me over and over all day that day; and I did face you; and you hung up on me.  It is you who could not stand the heat and you hung on me because you still know that I am right (because it is in the Bible, and you know the Bible pretty well); because deep down you know everyone is right who has confronted you privately and you still don’t listen.
You demand respect ahead of time – you demand that everyone just bow down to you, and tippy toe and walk on eggshells before you and ask questions according to your own sinful arrogant desires.
You have no experience in church work, pastoral counseling, relating to people.  You are disqualified.  


Even Roman Catholic priests and EO, OO, and ACE priests would disqualify you if they knew about all the cursing and name calling and dirty mouth and sinful anger. 

Also, I found the Tovia Singer clip that Jai made (it is on another of your followers You Tube channels) and I have downloaded it myself. So I have it.

Addendum: Dec. 14, 2021

see the first decimation by Anthony Rogers

This bears repeating: With emphasis and embolden for Sam Tetzel Shamoun:

“Good job Anthony, I really appreciate you and your ministry, when I have time to listen. Great job on both in Sola Fide in the early church fathers, and on putting up Greg Bahnsen’s message; and you conduct yourself properly with people, which is what all ministers, evangelists, missionaries, apologists, elders, pastors should do – the qualifications for ministry are clear in the NT. (1 Timothy 3, Titus 1, James chapter 3, Acts 13:1-4 (affirmed, confirmed, and sent out by a local Biblical church). Also, you did a great job on Sola Scriptura a while back in explaining it to a group of a lot of RCs and EO, (and OO and Assyrian church of the east folks, and other non-Reformed Protestants, etc. One or 2 Roman Catholics commenters, one of them, that I interact with some, said, “A more sophisticated defense of Sola Scriptura than what we usually hear” (something like that).

This is about Sam Tetzel Shamoun: (not about Albrecht, he seems to debate properly.) Some others have lots of knowledge, but are full of pugnaciousness (just wanting to fight and curse and go ad hominem and name call and chest thumping, etc. and argue and win arguments rather than glorify God by godly behavior – 1 Timothy 3 is clear – “above reproach”, “not pugnacious”, and James 3 – someone who knows how to control their tongue), sinful anger and bitterness and cursing, which disqualifies them.

Posted in Apologetics, church history, Gospel Truth, Roman Catholic False Doctrines, Roman Catholic false practices, Roman Catholicism, Sam Shamoun | 28 Comments

Meditation on Thankfulness

See all 10 passages and the notes. I am just going to highlight the first one with the notes for this one. A great reminder for this Thanksgiving Day.

10 key Bible verses on Thankfulness with the ESV study notes:

1. 1 Thessalonians 5:15–18

See that no one repays anyone evil for evil, but always seek to do good to one another and to everyone. Rejoice always, pray without ceasing, give thanks in all circumstances; for this is the will of God in Christ Jesus for you. Read More

ESV Study Bible Notes

Joy in Paul’s letters is a basic mark of the Christian (Rom. 14:17) and a fruit of the Spirit (Gal. 5:22). It is often associated with the firm hope of the Christian (e.g., Rom. 5:2–5; 12:12).

Pray without ceasing suggests a mental attitude of prayerfulness, continual personal fellowship with God, and consciousness of being in his presence throughout each day. Christians are to be marked by thanksgiving (Eph. 5:4, 20; Col. 2:7; 3:15, 17; 4:2). This probably refers to all of 1 Thess. 5:16–18.

Click on the link to see the rest of the 10 passages and notes with them.

Another Big thing to be thankful for:

As I have been studying more and more of church history, we as Americans need to be grateful for our freedoms and constitutional rights – freedom of religion, worship, speech, thought, ideas, freedom of assembly and the right to bear arms for self-defense, the rule of law in judicial process, etc. One thing I noticed in studying church history is that the modern idea of freedom of religion and speech comes out of getting rid of the state church government and persecutions of heretics and schismatics. The Waldensians (see below), the Anabaptists and Baptists were considered heretics at first, and it was brutal, especially for the Waldensians and Anabaptists. (see my post on Baptism and church history.) It is too bad the freedom of the press has lost it’s original way and intention and now more and more are promoting their own secular (and Socialist-Communist-Atheistic, mob-rule, LGBT intersectionality and Critical Race Theory) agenda rather than fairly reporting the news.

Dr. Gavin Ortlund continues to put out great videos on church history, historical theology, and discussions and debates with Roman Catholics, Eastern Orthodox, Lutherans, Anglicans and others. His recent video on the Waldensians is excellent.

We should be grateful for this and the American Constitution and our political freedoms, because at this point in history, it seems we are in danger of loosing a lot of these freedoms. The agenda of the powers of big corporate tech. companies, the main stream media, our education system, and leftist political powers are basically seeking to quash our Christian freedoms.

Posted in Spiritual growth, Thanksgiving | 2 Comments

Anthony Rogers decimated Sam “Tetzel Shamoun and William AlbrEck”

Be sure to listen carefully to all of this video and the one I linked to earlier. (see below) You can go to Shamoun’s YouTube channel (Shamounian) and see the 2 videos he did against Anthony Rogers, in a back and forth. Many more will probably happen between now and in March 2022, – which is when a formal debate is set for between Anthony Rogers (Reformed position on Sola Fide) and William Albrecht (Roman Catholic).

I wish I had time to type it all out and write more on this, but it takes time to listen again, start and stop and type, etc. Excellent material. Be sure to see all the links that Anthony Rogers gives in the title section of the video. There is a link to the full text of Marius Victorinus’ commentary on Galatians. Very clear that he taught an early form of what Luther and Calvin and Zwingli taught. (justification by grace alone, through faith alone, in Christ alone)

It was very interesting to find out about the connection between Marius Victorinus, Ambrose, Ambrosiaster, Augustine, and Simplicanius (Latin) or Simplician (English), who was the bishop of Milan after Ambrose, who (both of them) was involved with Augustine’s conversion. That Simplicanius recommended Victorinus’ commentary on Galatians to Augustine is a great connection. See also in Book VIII, chapter 2-5 of Augustine’s Confession.

see more here.

See here also for more comments

Not only in the first Video that I put up here on justification by faith alone in the early church fathers and how Anthony set it up by Romans 1:17 and many quotes from the Council of Trent, but also in this response.

Anthony also made great comments about Purgatory and the Marian dogmas and the Perpetual Virginity of Mary and how Rome applies that dogma to different areas of faith and doctrine and practice. (marriage and celibacy issues, praying to Mary, Marian piety, etc.)

Anthony knows how to answer quickly and with humor! Calling Sam “Tetzel Shamoun” and William Albrecht, “AlbrECK” is brilliant! (AlbreECK is a play off of the Roman Catholic theologian, John Eck, who famously debated Martin Luther between his posting of the 95 theses in 1517 and his trial at the Diet of Worms in 1521. (the debates were in 1519, lasting several weeks) In those debates, Luther’s views were becoming more clear on Sola Fide and Sola Scriptura. Shamoun gets a taste of his own medicine as he loves to dish out and say and things like, “I am just stirring up the pot” and “this is just friendly manly banter”, etc.

This bears repeating: With emphasis and embolden for Sam Tetzel Shamoun:

“Good job Anthony, I really appreciate you and your ministry, when I have time to listen. Great job on both in Sola Fide in the early church fathers, and on putting up Greg Bahnsen’s message; and you conduct yourself properly with people, which is what all ministers, evangelists, missionaries, apologists, elders, pastors should do – the qualifications for ministry are clear in the NT. (1 Timothy 3, Titus 1, James chapter 3, Acts 13:1-4 (affirmed, confirmed, and sent out by a local Biblical church). Also, you did a great job on Sola Scriptura a while back in explaining it to a group of a lot of RCs and EO, (and OO and Assyrian church of the east folks, and other non-Reformed Protestants, etc. One or 2 Roman Catholics commenters, one of them, that I interact with some, said, “A more sophisticated defense of Sola Scriptura than what we usually hear” (something like that).

This is about Sam Tetzel Shamoun: (not about Albrecht, he seems to debate properly.) Some others have lots of knowledge, but are full of pugnaciousness (just wanting to fight and curse and go ad hominem and name call and chest thumping, etc. and argue and win arguments rather than glorify God by godly behavior – 1 Timothy 3 is clear – “above reproach”, “not pugnacious”, and James 3 – someone who knows how to control their tongue), sinful anger and bitterness and cursing, which disqualifies them.

Posted in Apologetics, early church history, Justification, Reformation, Roman Catholic False Doctrines, Roman Catholic false practices, Roman Catholicism, Sam Shamoun, Sola Fide | 4 Comments

Historical Developments that slowly led to the eclipsing of the doctrine of justification by faith alone

I wrote an article on this years ago (2012) at James Swan’s blog, “Beggar’s All Reformation and Apologetics”. You can see the old article there. I have updated and edited this here. Anthony Rogers excellent recent presentation on Sola Fide in the early church has motivated me to update this article and expand it.

James Swan had linked to this book on Purgatory and I finally read through it recently. It is very helpful in getting a handle on how this unbiblical doctrine slowly developed in church history.
(see under point 5)

The biblical doctrine of justification by faith alone was eventually neglected, over-shadowed, and eclipsed by the slow development of other unbiblical doctrines and doctrines. Especially external works and rituals have the tendency to eclipse and over-shadow this doctrine.

It (Justification by grace through faith alone) appears at times in the writings of early Christians and early church fathers; but because some of these others things (listed below) were also developing at the same time, and sometimes some early church writers were inconsistent in seeming to affirm the doctrine of justification by faith alone, but also in other contexts emphasize other things; and also some of the other things listed below; this is one of the great reasons for why it is so hard and complicated to figure out what the early church believed about the doctrine after the Biblical era, and until Wycliffe, Hus, and Luther questioned these things. I agree with David King and William Webster and others, that the fathers are not as clear or consistent on this issue, although the evidence is that it was there, it just existed alongside of other traditions and emphases that eventually eclipsed, hid it.

1.  The Mono-Episcopate:  Biblical elders of a plurality of leaders was changed into taking one of the gifted elders out of the college and making him the sole bishop over the other elders in a church; then, later, in an entire area/city.  We can see that elders and bishops were interchangeable in the NT and in the earliest extra-canonical writing 1 Clement (96 AD), the Didache, Shepherd of Hermas.  Then, later we see a change in Ignatius (107-117 AD) and then Cyprian (around 250 AD) takes it further, and beyond in history.  see here for an Evangelical Introduction to church history part 1; and then, Part 2 here, that fleshes it all out.   But even Ignatius knows he does not have authority like an apostle.  (see his epistle to the Magnesians, epistle to the Trallians paragraph 3, verse 3, Ignatius to the Romans, paragraph 4, verse 3, and Ignatius to the Ephesians, paragraph 3, verse 1.  See also here, John Bugay has many excellent articles on this issue here and at Triablogue.   Even Cyprian, in the 250s AD, though he championed the ideas of the mono-episcopate of a local area, and that “the bishop is the church”; even he, did not agree that the bishop in Rome was the bishop of bishops.  He and 86 other bishops from all over the Christian world at the time, clearly stood against Stephen, the bishop of Rome at the time, in 258 AD.   The Mono-episcopate in one church developed into area bishops much later and then much later into the Papal claims and then the western church claiming their bishop is over the eastern churches. (1054 and afterward) Much later, the jurisdiction of the bishop of Rome seems to have taken off some by Leo 1 in 440 AD, and then even more from Gregory the Great in 601 AD onward.  After Gregory the Great the power of the bishop of Rome kept developing, reaching a high mark of arrogance and false doctrine in Boniface VIII’s statement in 1302 in the document, Unam Sanctum, (“It is necessary for every human creature to be in submission to the Roman Pontiff for salvation.”); to the arrogance of Pius IX with “I am the tradition”; thus eventually developed into the Papal doctrines and dogma of infallibility in 1870.

2.  Baptismal Regeneration:  NT baptism as an outward evidence and sign/symbol of repentance and faith, an inward reality of regeneration/being born again/union with Christ by faith and repentance was changed into having power to actually cause one to be born again and regenerated. (baptismal regeneration)  The debate and discussion on that issue went on for a long time in the com boxes.  Early writers seem to teach this, and it also seems that this understanding of baptism was pretty much unanimous – but see this group of articles and discussions, (category under “Baptismal Regeneration”). I don’t think it is so clear cut anymore that baptismal regeneration was “unanimous” (at least in the way that Roman Catholics understand it with ex opere operato priestly powers and the state government to punish those that don’t baptise their children (later eras), though it does seem like it.

Additional thoughts on Baptism: It seems to me that when infant baptism was added to the idea of Baptismal regeneration, along with the idea of ex opere operato (Latin for: “from the working, it works” = this means when you go through the right motions and right words of a ceremony / ritual / sacrament, then there is power there to perform and make effective what the Roman Catholic and other ritualistic churches believe happens. They believe that when a baby gets wet in baptism, and the Trinitarian formula is pronounced over them, and the ritual is done in water (for Roman Catholics, sprinkling, for the Eastern Orthodox, immersion three times), then the baby is sanctified, justified, cleansed of original sin – grace comes to the baby with power. But RCs believe that a child looses that justifying grace later when they start sinning, therefore they have to start getting that back by confirmation, confession, penance and doing other works like prayers to Mary and saints and giving alms to the poor. (see # 3 on penance and 4 on confession to the priest and # 7 on categories of venial vs. mortal sins.)

The Biblical and earliest historical examples of baptism we have are adult believers baptism or credo-baptism. But when infant baptism was added alongside of adult baptism in the late second century and early third century. Tertullian wrote against infant baptism in the 190s-2000s; Hippolytus in 215 is the first clear example of infant baptism. But adult believer’s baptism continued with many examples until around the late 300s into the 400s and 500s when infant baptism became the norm, because the whole culture had become “Christian” and parents naturally wanted to baptize their infants according to the prevailing teaching and ideas of the times. When infant baptism is combined with:

A. ex opere operato priestly powers and B. cultural and societal norming of the practice and C. The unity of the State government and enforcement of those that disobey – this created a big problem that was only turned around by the Anabaptists (1500s) and later, General Baptists (1600s) and Reformed Baptists (1600s) movements. The imprisonment of Fritz Erbe and the execution by drowning of Feliz Manz and the executions of many other Anabaptists and Baptists in history was shocking when I first learned these historical facts.

See my article on Baptism, Baptists, and Church History for more.

3.  Penance:  Internal Repentance in the NT (a work of God on the inside that changes us in our heart, soul and mind, resulting in a radical change of life) was changed into an outward external work and/or ritual of penance, the work of satisfaction that one was assigned to do by a priest after confession. (repent vs. “do penance”)  William Webster has an excellent article on this the combines a lot of the other points also.    This was the first point in his list of the 95 theses protest by Martin Luther, in 1517. In the early church, “doing penance” was developed along with private confession to a priest along with purgatory and then, with the treasury of merit of the saints into indulgences which really “took off” during the Crusades and was the spark that started Martin Luther questioning the Roman Catholic Church in 1517. Jerome wrongly translated the Greek word, “metanoia” into “do penance” in Latin, in the 400s, and this persisted until Martin Luther began to see the problem.

Addendum:  (January 3, 2014) – John Bugay made an excellent addition in the com box (on Aug. 15, 2012) to this issue on how the Latin mis-translation of the Greek word for repentance affected subsequent theology and church history. 

4.  Private Confession of sins to the priest for forgiveness:  Biblical confession of sin (1 John 1:9; James 5:16), and public confession of serious sin, developed into private confession of sins to a priest.  See also William Webster’s article under point # 3.  Later, ex opere operato powers were given to the priests after the Donatist controversy.

5.  Purgatory – The idea of praying for the dead for “refreshment” (Tertullian), developed into some kind of after death purging and cleansing (Augustine); and that was developed into a place called Purgatory, with time spent there, sometimes spanning years, decades, even centuries!! Indulgences of paying money or fighting in Crusades promised time lesssened in Purgatory! Clement of Alexandria and Origen seem to be the first to speculate on these ideas, then Augustine, in the late 300s and 400s, speculated on a an action of purging / cleansing, but actually did not call it a place or did not speculate on time spent in Purgatory. The doctrine of Purgatory really began to take off more after the 600s AD, when Gregory the bishop of Rome in 590-604 AD made it more mainstream, but even then, it was not until the 1100s and beyond that it was taught as a physical place with time spent there.
The Birth of Purgatory, by Jacques Le Goff. 

6. Indulgences – goes with Purgatory. The selling of indulgences to lessen time in purgatory was the issue that sparked Luther’s 95 theses. See the debate between Dr. James White and Roman Catholic Peter Williams.

Even after the Council of Trent (1545-1563) reformed the selling and buying aspect of indulgences, indulgences as a doctrine, concept and practice is still formally recognized as a doctrine and practiced in the Roman Catholic Church.

7. The treasury of merit – goes with Purgatory. That the saints, especially Mary, have extra merit stored up in heaven that you can get brought down to you by works of merit and add to your merit and reduce time in Purgatory.

James Swan has earlier linked to an excellent book called The Birth of Purgatory by Jacques Le Goff.   (Scroll down in this “Resources on Roman Catholicism” blog article)

8.  A NT office of priests.  This was wrong, as there is no NT office of “priest” in the local church.  None.  Jesus is our high priest.  For the NT church, there are
a. elders/overseers (same as bishops)/pastors and b.  deacons.  Every believer/saint is a priest to God.  (1 Peter 2:5-10; Revelation 1:6; 5:9-10.)   The word “priest” seems to be first applied to elders and ministers after they started applying OT language of sacrifice in worship to the thanksgiving and worship in the church and at the celebration of the eucharist.  (see # 13)


9.  Categories of mortal sins and venial sins and distinguishing between them. That seems to have started with Tertullian.

10.  Ideas of merit for good works, which is a contradiction to the Biblical teachings on grace.

11.  Gaining merit and indulgences through Pilgrimages to graves and holy sites.  Simple remembering of martyrs’ day of death as a “birthday” (going to heaven) and then venerating their bones (Would Polycarp have approved of such a practice?) , then to pilgrimages and visiting graves of dead saints and praying to them at their graves.

12.  Prayers to dead saints.  2 Maccabees was used to justify this. Whether at their graves or later, in front of pictures, later the icons, or statues.

13.  Prayers to Mary (and statues and icons to her) and the over-exalting of Mary as the greatest human mediator, and then later other false dogmas such as Mary’s Perpetual Virginity, her sinlessness, her Immaculate Conception(1854), and the Bodily Assumption (1950).  She is called, “co-mediatrix” – a clear contradiction to 1 Timothy 2:5.

14.  Almsgiving as a way of satisfaction for sins, often part of the penance assigned by a priest.

15.  Sacrificial language of the mass.  From using NT language of the sacrifices at the temple (Matthew 5:23-26), combining it with the need to reconcile with brothers before worship (Matthew 18:15-20) and taking the sacrificial language of the prophesy of Malachi 1:11 and applying all of that to the eucharist/Lord’s supper in 1 Corinthians 11/Luke 22/Matthew 26. The sacrificial language of the OT (Malachi) and NT (Matthew 5:23-26) was not meant to say that the eucharist would be a sacrifice, but rather an application of OT language to worship/thanksgiving/memorial of Christ’s death/celebration in the NT church.

16.   Transubstantiation:  From memorial/spiritual presence of Christ in communion/ eucharist (Biblical) to actual physical presence (Justin Martyr to Radbertus in the 800s) to transubstantiation (developed from the 800s into 1215 AD)

Sometimes the doctrine of justification by faith alone can be discerned in the early church, in the writings of Clement, The Epistle to Diognetes, John Chrysostom (though inconsistent with some other things) and Ambrosiaster seem to be really clear references.   So the early church fathers were inconsistent on the issue of justification by faith.  These 16 practices/doctrines together (and probably with other issues not named here, too) combined to eclipse / hide the doctrine of justification by faith alone, like the moon hiding the sun in an eclipse.   All of these things combined together to over-shadow the doctrine of justification by faith alone over the centuries until Wycliff and Hus and Luther started questioning these things

Posted in Apologetics, Baptismal Regeneration, church history, Development of Doctrine, early church history, Eastern Orthodoxy, Prayers to Mary, Roman Catholic False Doctrines, Roman Catholic false practices, Roman Catholicism | Comments Off on Historical Developments that slowly led to the eclipsing of the doctrine of justification by faith alone

Sola Fide, the Council of Trent, & some early church fathers (Anthony Rogers)

I listened to the whole presentation once; I wish I had time to take notes and type up more right now. This was a great way to celebrate the Protestant Reformation on October 31, 2021.

Anthony Rogers did a great job here, demonstrating with lots of quotes from the Council of Trent, setting it up, that the Roman Catholic Church abandoned some of the early church tradition of their understanding of “faith alone”. Quotes from John Chrysostom, Ambrose, Ambrosiaster, Basil, Augustine, Epiphanius and the Council of Elvira concerning images in churches, and others.

The early church fathers were not infallible, and of course the Roman Catholics and Eastern Orthodox are going to push back with quotes from these same fathers in another context on their ideas about other doctrines that may seem to contradict what they say in a different context about justification by faith alone. The big thing to remember is that human beings can be inconsistent, both knowingly and unknowingly inconsistent in their theology. Human beings are fallible. “We all stumble in many ways.” James 3:1-2

I wrote this to Anthony at another one of this humorous videos. (see below this)

Good job Anthony, I really appreciate you and your ministry, when I have time to listen. Great job on both in Sola Fide in the early church fathers, and on putting up Greg Bahnsen’s message; and you conduct yourself properly with people, which is what all ministers, evangelists, missionaries, apologists, elders, pastors should do – the qualifications for ministry are clear in the NT. (1 Timothy 3, Titus 1, James chapter 3, Acts 13:1-4 (affirmed, confirmed, and sent out by a local Biblical church). Also, you did a great job on Sola Scriptura a while back in explaining it to a group of a lot of RCs and EO, (and OO and Assyrian church of the east folks, and other non-Reformed Protestants, etc. One or 2 Roman Catholics commenters, one of them, that I interact with some, said, “A more sophisticated defense of Sola Scriptura than what we usually hear” (something like that).

Some others have lots of knowledge, but are full of pugnaciousness (just wanting to fight and curse and go ad hominem and name call and chest thumping, etc. and argue and win arguments rather than glorify God by godly behavior – 1 Timothy 3 is clear – “above reproach”, “not pugnacious”, and James 3 – someone who knows how to control their tongue), sinful anger and bitterness and cursing, which disqualifies them.

You did a good job (with David Wood helping) in your interaction with Sheikh Uthman in San Diego. (James 3:1-18 says with our tongue those that bless God and curse their fellow man, are disqualified for ministry – Thank you for not only being sound in doctrine and theology, and using reason and logic in argumentation, but also in being a good model in behavior! You did a great job of setting the Sola Fide issue up by all the quotes from the Council of Trent, which demonstrates that the Roman Catholic Church anathematized the heart out of the gospel by condemning justification by faith alone, and also by condemning all who don’t agree with them on Purgatory, the sacrifice of the mass, Transubstantiation, & the authority of Rome and the Pope.

Sincerely,

Ken Temple

The humorous video where I made my comments:

Yes, Anthony has disarmed them.

Posted in Apologetics, church history, early church history, Roman Catholic False Doctrines, Roman Catholic false practices, Roman Catholicism, Sola Fide, The Council of Trent | 2 Comments

Jerome: presbyters are the same as bishops

Jerome lived from 342-420 AD, and translated the Bible into the Latin Vulgate, and was one of the most famous early church scholars.

“A presbyter, therefore, is the same as a bishop, and before dissensions were introduced into religion by the instigation of the devil, and it was said among the peoples, ‘I am of Paul, I am of Apollos, and I of Cephas,’ Churches were governed by a common council of presbyters; afterwards, when everyone thought that those whom he had baptised were his own, and not Christ’s, it was decreed in the whole world that one chosen out of the presbyters should be placed over the rest, and to whom all care of the Church should belong, that the seeds of schisms might be plucked up. Whosoever thinks that there is no proof from Scripture, but that this is my opinion, that a presbyter and bishop are the same, and that one is a title of age, the other of office, let him read the words of the apostle to the Philippians, saying, ‘Paul and Timotheus, servants of Christ to all the saints in Christ Jesus which are at Philippi with the bishops and deacons.’” (Jerome, Commentariorum In Epistolam Ad Titum, “Commentary on the Epistle to Titus”, PL 26:562-563)
And:
“Therefore, as we have shown, among the ancients presbyters were the same as bishops; but by degrees, that the plants of dissension might be rooted up, all responsibility was transferred to one person. Therefore, as the presbyters know that it is by the custom of the Church that they are to be subject to him who is placed over them so let the bishops know that they are above presbyters rather by custom than by Divine appointment, and ought to rule the Church in common, following the example of Moses, who, when he alone had power to preside over the people Israel, chose seventy, with the assistance of whom he might judge the people. We see therefore what kind of presbyter or bishop should be ordained.” (Jerome, Commentariorum In Epistolam Ad Titum, PL 26:563)


Dr. White cited these Jerome passages in his response to Paul F. M. Zahl, who argued for the Anglican-Episcopal -mono-episcopate church government.  (Perspectives on Church Government:  Five Views of Church Polity, Edited by Chad Owen Brand and R. Stanton Norman; Broadman and Holman Publishers, 2004, p.251-252)

This reflects New Testament teaching:

Titus 1:5-7 – clearly shows elders and bishops are the same church office.

Acts 20:17 – “called the elders”, v. 28 – the Holy Spirit has made you overseers (bishops, episkopoi) and you are to do the work of shepherding (pastoring) the church of God . . .

1 Peter 5:1-4 – Peter is fellow-elder with them – to the elders, shepherd the flock, serving as overseers / bishops / episcopoi

Acts 14:23 – the apostles appointed elders (presbyters) for each church

Philippians 1:1

Also in the earliest church history after the NT was finished:

1 Clement 42-44

Didache 15

For more, see my review of Rod Bennett’s first book, “Four Witnesses”, part 2.

Here is an excerpt from my article:

As we mentioned in Part 1 of the Review of Four Witnesses,  on page 87, Rod stops the quote of 1 Clement 44 as precisely the exact place that would show that overseers/bishops (Greek: επισκοποι – episcopoi ) is the same office as elders (Greek: πρεσβυτεροι – presbuteroi).  This is clear in the earlier New Testament writings, such as Acts 14:2320:1728Titus 1:5-7; 1 Timothy 3, 1 Peter 5:1-5Philippians 1:1.  Even other very early non-canonical writings confirm this, such as the Didache 15, and Irenaeus, Against Heresies, Book IV, chapter 26, no. 5.
“Our apostles also knew, through our Lord Jesus Christ, and there would be strife on account of the office of the episcopate. For this reason, therefore, inasmuch as they had obtained a perfect fore-knowledge of this, they appointed those [ministers] already mentioned, and afterwards gave instructions, that when these should fall asleep, other approved men should succeed them in their ministry. We are of opinion, therefore, that those appointed by them, or afterwards by other eminent men, with the consent of the whole Church, and who have blamelessly served the flock of Christ in a humble, peaceable, and disinterested spirit, and have for a long time possessed the good opinion of all, cannot be justly dismissed from the ministry.
Rod, used a different translation than the one above, but stopped the quote here on page 87 of his book.
You can look at the standard ccel.org translation here.

The quote continues:
“For our sin will not be small, if we eject from the episcopate those who have blamelessly and holily fulfilled its duties.  Blessed are those presbyters who, having finished their course before now, have obtained a fruitful and perfect departure [from this world]; for they have no fear lest any one deprive them of the place now appointed them. But we see that ye have removed some men of excellent behavior from the ministry, which they fulfilled blamelessly and with honor. “ 1 Clement 44

Posted in church history, early church history, Jerome, Rod Bennett, Roman Catholic False Doctrines, Roman Catholic false practices, Roman Catholicism | Comments Off on Jerome: presbyters are the same as bishops