Gigantian Apologetics

29/05/2026

Bl. Pope Urban II Declares A Crusade

It is unfortunate I had to cut out a portion, lest it be blocked for copyright. Regardless, the point remains the same. The Pope saw the fall of Christendom to a militant force, and he organised the first of many defensive responses.

28/05/2026

Refuting ‘Bible .ca’: Misconceptions About The Bible Canon (Part 1)

There are a bunch of pages they wrote about how the Bible was apparently compiled, and I won’t cover them all due to the sheer number of irrelevant content. What I will focus on instead is dividing up the pages by topics and addressing their individual claims.

He firstly misrepresents what Catholics and Orthodox teach regarding the circulation of the books of the New Testament prior to their formal canonisation as part of the Bible (which earlier articles of his show he doesn’t even know about that process). He accuses us of misrepresenting the aforementioned topic, that we deny the books of the New Testament were being used around Christendom. We don’t. We deny that there was anything close to a canon list of the New Testament in the 1st century AD. There would be attempts to produce a list of books in the following centuries, but they were partial and had no authority behind them until the 382 Council of Rome.

Then he gives us a ‘stumper questions’:

‘If the Roman Catholic church gave the world the Bible, being infallible, then why did Rome reject or question the inspiration of James and Hebrews , then later accept it? Conversely, Rome accepted as scripture books that were later rejected. If the Catholic church really is illuminated by the Holy Spirit so that men can trust her as “God’s organization”, why was she so wrong about something so simple? Should not the “Holy See” have known?’

Because Rome wasn’t defining the Bible canon at the time. People are allowed to have opinions, you know. Until they formally defined the Bible canon thanks to the Holy Spirit working through them, they could question the identity of the authors. Until BCA finally understand Papal Infallibility as it is intended to be understood, he has no credibility in his criticisms.

Read more: https:// gigantianapologetics .substack. com/p/refuting-bible-ca-misconceptions

28/05/2026

Apologies for the late post today, I had to re-render the video and upload it again to get rid of a spelling mistake.

It's no coincidence that they chose four candidates again. You need at least two Bishops present for any valid consecration, so by having four, it increases the chances of them having surviving [illicit] bishops a couple of decades from now, so they can do another round of illicit consecrations.

As for the candidate who is concealing the abuse cases in the SSPX, I'm not exaggerating. The scale of the abuse in the SSPX is far larger than you realise, but they do a far better job of keeping it under wraps through threats and guilt tripping.

https://youtu.be/XfAM3zLFa18

27/05/2026

My main release for this week. This particular video is inspired by the Protestants who claim the Bl. Virgin Mary wasn't already married to St Joseph. She was, but Marriages back then weren't the same as our Christian Marriages today. The real reason for her confusion was that she was a former Temple Virgin, and her vow of Perpetual Virginity would prohibit her from sexual relations.

Watch: https://youtu.be/ODxRbQOvIL4

27/05/2026

It's work in progress, so please let me know what you all want to see on it.

Get more from Gigantals on Patreon. Educational content for Catholics and Christians in general.. Support Gigantals and get exclusive access to their work.

26/05/2026

Biblical Chronology (Part 243) - Khyan Of The Hyksos (Unknown - Unknown)

Khyan is another of the Hyksos Kings. We have evidence of a sphinx bearing his name, a statue reappropriated with his name carven on the side (pictured), and objects with his names on them were found in in Crete and the Hittite capital. So he was well-known at the time. He was apparently the strongest of the Hyksos leaders, when their power was at their peak.

We do find a version of his name in the Bible. In Amos 5:25-6, the name 'Chiun/Kiyun' in the context of the Exodus appears.

25/05/2026

Prepared for Heresy

I'm getting involved in a lot of arguments relating to the Bible canon lately, and it just so happens that I'm having to study it extensively for my book. It appears that God wants to test my research...

22/05/2026

Refuting ‘Bible .ca’: Answering his apparently unanswerable questions (Part 2)

Here we return with a continued refutation of the 29 ‘irrefutable questions’ that BCA probably should’ve done better research on. Let’s see if this next back of questions are at least more plausible than the last ones…

Why do Roman Catholics always use 2 Timothy 2:2; 3:14 as Bible proof that extra-biblical oral tradition is to be followed through apostolic succession, when tradition says Timothy became the bishop of Ephesians, which through succession, is now part of the Greek Orthodox church headed out of Constantinople? If 2 Timothy 2:2 proves succession, doesn’t this prove the Roman Catholic church is not part of that succession?

Not really, no. Apostolic Succession is only broken when someone performs it invalidly. It can be performed illicitly yet remain valid. In the case of the Eastern Orthodox, their ordinations are valid but illicit. They are Apostolic Succession despite being in major theological error and schism from Rome. The Anglicans used to have Apostolic Succession too, but then they changed their Holy Orders which invalidated them.

Besides, whilst the assurance of not falling into ever was given to St Peter and his successors, it was not given to the other Apostles, Disciples, and their successors. There used to be a Catholic Archbishop of Ephesus showing a valid lineage despite the Eastern Orthodox being in schism, but that has since been suppressed. Probably to encourage the Eastern Orthodox to return to Communion without there appearing to be two competing Bishops for the same jurisdiction.

The Catholic Church is far larger than just St Timothy, so we don’t have to worry about us being out of Communion with the successor of St Timothy in Ephesus. We have the Pope and those in Communion with him.

Read More: https:// gigantianapologetics. substack. com/p/refuting-bible-ca-answering-his-apparently-9a5

21/05/2026

Biblical Chronology (Part 242) - Sheshi Of The Hyksos (Unknown - Unknown)

This guy is a confusing one. Some Egyptologists don't consider him to be Hyksos, or just a local official prior to the Hyksos arrival. Others think he was indeed a Hyksos leader. What we can confirm is his name is Semitic. We see it in Numbers 13:22 as 'שֵׁשַׁ֣י' (Shesha). It could mean 'noble' or 'wearing white', which does make it seem more like a title than a person, and so some Egyptologists equate him with Salitis, whom I will cover later.

Regardless of the confusion, there are hundreds of seals with his name on them, making him extremely well-attested.

Unfortunately, names aren't enough to determine the acts of one's life if they aren't recorded elsewhere. So we don't know what happened during his life or reign.

20/05/2026

My newest release on the SSPX being in schism.

To provide some context for the specific points mentioned here:

Pope St Paul VI criticised Lefebvre's attacks on Vatican II as being an inherent misunderstanding of the Council. Despite offering to send theologians to teach him how it was meant to be understood, Lefebvre declined.

The Church is a 'Perfect Society' in the philosophical sense, meaning that it is completely self-sufficient. It doesn't need another Church or institution to rely upon for its existence. The SSPX used to claim the Sacraments of the Novus Ordo Liturgy were invalid, but then softened their view to claim they were 'an offense to God'. Which is sacrilegious. So for them to hold this view, they reject the fact that the Church is a Perfect Society, which is a Secondary Object of Infallibility.

Lefebvre used to travel around a lot and perform the Sacraments in other Bishops' Dioceses. But this is illegal according to Canon Law, and was condemned in three different ways as far back as Nicaea I. A Bishop cannot travel to and perform the Sacraments a place outside of their jurisdiction.

Link: https://youtu.be/Jqp5ZyQRROY