Visit our website: www.kingdompresbyterians.com/ Make a donation: donorbox.org/presbyterians-fo... Theology Matters: www.theologymatters.com/ Find a church: www.google.com/maps/d/u/0/edi...
Amazing video. I just found out my Great Grandfather was a Scottish Covenanter from Northern Ireland (family originally from Scotland). They were heavily persecuted in Scotland and 18,000+ of them died fighting for the religious freedom we all enjoy today. They also were the first abolitionists against slavery in America. And won numerous battles in The American Revolution. They also would not vote in America for the longest time since there was no mention of Jesus in The Constitution. Incredible history. Have you heard of them Zoomer?
That sounds like the RPCNA (the denomination I'm in). Political Dissent was one of our denominational distinctives for a long time. The actual church I go to was actually a stop on the Underground Railroad and was originally called the "Covenanter Church".
@@mattosamanandesu Yeah, from what I could figure out they became RPCNA. I thought that was amazing they didn't vote because Jesus wasn't mentioned in the Constitution. Their history is amazing. So principled and would never bend. How is RPCNA today?
@@mwrr25 The RPCNA is certainly still quite conservative and some people still hold that conviction on voting, but it has changed a bit and is not a requirement. I am overly and abundantly blessed to be in a very solid RP church that is faithful to the Scriptures and our Reformed heritage. My church was established in the 1800's and has seen many ups and downs (currently in a very good spot). There is certainly work to be done, but Christ continues to build His church. The channel ReadyToHarvest has some good videos covering the RPCNA if you're curious.
Presbyterians: "Presbyterians are the only Church governed by Elders and Synods!" Lutherans: "Bro, you stole that from us..." Presbyterians: "So? Stealing from Lutherans is 95% of our theology!"
@@allfleshisgrass. The existence of reprobation in predestination, limited atonement, perseverance of the saints, covenant theology (which is basically how we interpret the whole bible), how the sacraments work, spiritual presence in the Lord Supper, regulative principle of worship and a lot more. It is really a whole different theological tradition.
The non denominational church I grew up in was governed like a Presbyterian church. The church elders have authority over the pastor, keep him in line, and make most of the important decisions.
The same way that all Protestants have authority. The Bible trumps any kind of tradition. So if you find yourself in a non denominational church where the elders all meet the requirements put forth in the Bible, they are given their authority directly by the congregation so long as they are in line with those requirements. What I like about Protestant theology is that authority can come directly from God, and it's a bit of a shame that the mainline churches over focus on from whom you inherit said authority. I would almost think that an overly dogmatic Presbyterian might have rejected the apostle Paul when he first started his ministry on these grounds, as he had no connection to Jesus that was inherited. (In a way that the disciples could trace based on Jesus' lifetime. Rather, God spoke to him and he listened, and that is all that was required for him to have the power to lead the church. In the same way, the Bible lays out some foundations for how to handle church. It must be orderly, there must he hierarchy of some kind (elders), and those in charge must meet certain requirements and be held to higher standards. That's it. That's where the authority comes from. And that's part of the tragedy of churches that are over focused on human sources of authority. We don't follow Paul, Apollos, Cephas, or any Saint to understand where church authority comes from. It's given to the disciples to make disciples, and so long as you are following Christ in the ways He commanded us to run a church, you have authority.
@@redeemedzoomer6053 My church is similar, and I would have to say that since the great commission and the tongues of fire authority can be gained directly from and by the Holy Spirit.
@@micahbannister1287 This is super important. I agree. If this is murky, it can be easy to be led astray by denominations/churches based purely on their claims to apostolic authority, without ever examining their doctrine.
That means church history is often Ignored or rarely taught. And because everyone is still protestant leaning, they don't look at the saints. The issue is when you apply manmade doctrines and try to call it "theology" it breeds religious thinking and brainwashing.
When you disagree with Pastor Jim Bob of the former Taco Bell turned church on doctrine regarding who and what the Nephilim were so now you are going straight to hell
Yeah… it’s sketchy… but I just like to care about the actual messages they speak. I had a real feeling of being saved yesterday. The first time I got “saved” wasn’t real honestly. It was just agreeing to what they wanted for me to say, that was all.
@@Crazy_Chriz Agreed, there are some really good Non-Denominational churches that have outstanding pastors and sermons. And hot take, Contemporary music is just as good as traditional.
Love these videos, I am in a place at the moment where I am questioning my 'pentecostal' faith (have been for a while, but more now than ever), and I already believe a lot of reformed doctrine. Now though, it's come to a time I have many more questions. This whole series has been great so far.
the founding fathers and america as a whole were split between deism and calvinism during the revolution. most of the 13 colonies set up state churches after we gained independance (you could only be in office if you were a member of a certain denomination), so deism was not the majority opinion
Not all of them. There were many orthodox Christians. But the more famous founders were still religious and had a high respect for the Bible even though they were diestic, unitarian, or rationalist.
I need guidance and blessings of Lord Jesus Christ. I believe in Lord Jesus Christ. My interest is in the Christianity. I have faith in the Holy Bible. Lord Jesus Christ is the real God.
Great, thanks to Calvin for descovering fiftheen centuries Ad Domini that Bishops and Elders are the same things! No one cares about 1500 years of consistent teaching on this matter, right?
Firstly, the founder of Presbyterianism was John Knox, secondly, this has been known and discussed for many years before Calvin and even within the Catholic Church. There are Catholics who recognize that the form of government of the early Church was Presbyterian, but who see the episcopate as a development guided by the Holy Spirit.
You know that st. Jerome is talking all the time about for example monks and priests. Imagine he was presbytherian, do you still have monks and priests? ;)
@pedroguimaraes6094 Also Calvin was already attacking the priesthood (incl. Bishophood in the Catholic sence). Name us one Catholic scholar who agrees with Knox, especially in regarding to the priesthood in the early church.
*chefs kiss* The Internets purest Presbyterian revisionist propaganda. I kid. I love this channel and have been a fan since nearly the begging. I assume some of the claims here are tongue in cheek but I fell its worth pointing out a few things. TLDR; The Presbyterians were influential in the construction of America, but did not have nearly as outsized as the video portrays. Many of the things credited to Presbytarians here arguably or obviously belong to other Protestant denominations, Catholics, or secularists. Presbyterians did have a massive influence on the structure of American government, the middle colonies were after all the heartland of Presbyterianism in America and its no coincidence that Pennsylvanians, Virginians, and New Yorker's had outsized influence in the design of the nation. That being said, the Presbyterian church in America underwent schism in response to the American revolution. As noted in the video, the congregationalist church structure emphasizes independent self government. The Puritans in New England were congregationalist radicals and its no surprise that virtually all the agitation leading up to the Declaration of Independence started there. While the religious justifications for rebellion may very well have been drawn from Rutherford's idea that Romans 13 included the qualification that since governments were instituted by God as his minister, if the government was acting contrary to Gods laws it was illegitimate and could be thrown off, many of the proofs given for the British government subverting Gods law were drawn from liberalisms interpretation of natural law. The Idea was held and pushed primarily by Deists who popularized it into general acceptance. Luther's justification for rebellion also played a large in relation to the German Peasants war also played a large roll in justifying revolt, that is that legitimate violence can only be carried out by the state according to scripture and therefore any rebellion against the state must be led by a part of that state. I believe the idea was called revolt of the princes. In the Americans case the legitimacy came from the duly elected colonial governments. Outside of the congregationalists in New England, spontaneous non sanctioned violence was rare. Finally, the idea of separation of church and state has its roots as far back as Greek philosophy but finds its first expression in Christianity in St. Augustines City of God. Luther adopted Augustines expression, known as the two kingdoms doctrine, early on and Madison explicitly credits him particularly with influencing American ideas of separation of church and state. It was the radical reformers though, the Anabaptist Michael Sattler in particular, who advocated for a total separation, a wall of separation as Jefferson called it, that had the most obvious impact on the Diest founders like Jefferson and Franklin. Secularists also made important contributions to the concept. Montesquieu, an influential liberal thinker and nominal catholic quoted heavily by the founders, expressed a legal framework for the separation of church and state that closely resembles what we have in the U.S. now.
Okay, but this is a 10 minute video and not an extensive video about the formation of the United States. Basically, what he said in the video is the same thing you said in your comment, that Presbyterianism had a massive influence on the formation of the United States and in fact it did
Respectfully, I disagree. The reason Bishops and Elders are given the same requirements is because the Bishop is a Presbyterian of the Presbyters. Watch Anglivan Aesthetics for more on that.
And why the Didache and other early Cristian writings only mention one leadership position (Elder / Bishop) and when bishop is mentioned it is identical to Elder?
The separation of church and state, at least in the way the founders of the United States intended it, is literally both. It's intended to prevent both the church and the state from controlling one another. What it DOES NOT mean is that the two can't have any mixing at all, despite this being the modern popular interpretation.
I love watching your videos. I pass them onto the "heathen anglicans" (as I once heard them described) of my current congregation (all dear friends). I was baptised into the Free Presbyterian Church of Scotland and all my childhood memories are of the beautiful simplicity of the Sabbath, the preaching and joyful a cappella singing of the psalms. I'm exiled in England. The nearest FPCS congregation is 145 miles away in London and unreachable. I attend an Anglican service in my local, very pretty, village church. It's not the same thing, rather weird, full of imagery, vestments, liturgies, hymns, anthems and far from the Westminster Confession of Faith but, on the other hand, by God's Will, there's 'a lot of hyssop' in it. I will not be moved. All the best.
Technically, the Congregationalists not the Presbyterians founded New England. I get that both are from the Reformed tradition, but they're still different. The Puritans took their congregationalist form of church government and then applied it to civil government. Tom Hooker's sermon on government was then used to create the constitution of Conneticut making it the first written constitution in world history.
Acts 1:21-26 shows us that Apostolic Succession is based on the laying on of hands. Saints Ignatius of Antioch and Irenaeus of Lyons distinguish between elders and bishops. This shows us that episcopal government developed by the second century at the latest. It's important to remember that the words "presbyteroi," "episkopoi," and even "diakonoi" were just regular Greek words meaning "elders," "overseers," and "servants" respectively. Really, it wouldn't be incorrect to describe any of the three orders with any of these words. The early Church was more fluid with these names even if the structure was there. In 1 Timothy 1:3 and Titus 1:5, we see that Timothy and Titus are individually given special oversight over their respective regions, which would support the episcopacy. The functional system was there even if the vocabulary started off a little vague. This is the view supported by St. John Chrysostom: “[In Philippians 1:1 Paul says,] ‘To the co-bishops and deacons.’ What does this mean? Were there plural bishops of some city? Certainly not! It is the presbyters that [Paul] calls by this title; for these titles were then interchangeable, and the bishop is even called a deacon. That is why, when writing to Timothy, he says, ‘Fulfill your diaconate’ [2 Tim. 4:5], although Timothy was then a bishop. That he was in fact a bishop is clear when Paul says to him, ‘Lay hands on no man lightly’ [1 Tim. 5:22], and again, ‘Which was given you with the laying on of hands of the presbytery’ [1 Tim. 4:14], and presbyters would not have ordained a bishop” (Saint John Chrysostom: Homilies on Philippians 1:1 [A.D. 402]). This is corroborated by Theodoret of Cyrus: "By overseer here he (Paul) means elder, as we demonstrated in commenting on the letter to the Philippians. Here, too, it is very easy to grasp this: after the laws for overseers he puts in writing those for deacons, making no mention of the elders. But, as I remarked, at that time they were in the habit of calling the same people overseers and elders, whereas to those now called overseers they gave the name apostles" (Theodoret of Cyrrhus, Commentary on 1 Timothy 3:1). It's true that Saint Jerome says that the episcopacy is an innovation. However, it is more likely that he is incorrect here. In saying this, he contradicts not only every other patristic but also himself. Elsewhere, he claims the episcopacy goes back to the Apostles: "Simon Peter the son of John, from the village of Bethsaida in the province of Galilee, brother of Andrew the apostle, and himself chief of the apostles, after having been bishop of the church of Antioch and having preached to the Dispersion - the believers in circumcision, in Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia and Bithynia - pushed on to Rome in the second year of Claudius to overthrow Simon Magus, and held the sacerdotal chair there for twenty-five years until the last, that is the fourteenth, year of Nero" (Saint Jerome: On Illustrious Men). As I hinted at before, episcopal government can be found in Scripture. 1 Timothy 5:17-22, 1 Timothy 1:3, and Titus 1:5 clearly show Saint Paul charging Saints Timothy and Titus with the duties of a bishop. Saints Timothy and Titus are given authority over the other elders in their respective regions. For example, in 1 Timothy 5:17-22, The words "Never admit," "rebuke," "I charge you," and "Do not be hasty" are singular in the original Greek. This shows that Timothy personally had authority over the elders of Ephesus as a bishop. This view is corroborated by patristic evidence that says Saints Timothy and Titus were the bishops of Ephesus and Crete respectively (Eusebius: Church History, Book III).
Alright... I do enjoy your vivid presentations. When * crazy televangelists, non denominational " I burst laughter out! I don't see this as a put down because you, as the video creator, has a wee bit of that yourself. I continue to appreciate you video content.
I've been looking for a church denomination to go to for about a year now and so far I've been torn between deciding on Lutheran or Presbyterian. (Deciding is the easy part. Finding either of the two is hard considering I'm surrounded by baptist and non dom churches) Anyway what i was getting at is you're really selling Calvinism/presbyterian pretty well.
An important note: The Council (Synod) of Hieria was called for by Constantine V, a civil authority. In other words, it was the state telling the church what to do. And none of the patriarchs were there. Which I guess doesn't mean much from a Presbyterian perspective, but does show that the synod was not universally accepted. And if it was the state telling the church what to do, and we uphold the separation of church and state, then we can justifiably say that its contents are not worth taking seriously. Otherwise, we're saying that the state can tell the church what to do.
Great stuff, as usual. I appreciate your work in the Kingdom. I'm also a Presbyterian (PCA) - so we are on the same wavelength (though you are light years ahead of me in many ways). I would love to hear your take on a couple of books I published. I also have one coming out this year on a defense of a modified form of Calvinism. I expect to get some heat from that one. But your insights would be most helpful. The author name is RS Trifulescu. The first two works are on Christianity basics. I know you are quite busy, so no problem if you don't have time for this amateur. God bless you and your work!
This has been a longstanding belief in the western church including Roman Catholic Church and a plurality of church fathers comparing the Sabbath to the Lord's Day.
Nice series. Can you dive in apostolic sucession on a general matter but specially on the protestant case? I am a baptist being almost converted to catholicism (a part of me really wants it but another is very uneasy on doing it).
Anyone else notice that a lot of pentecostal and evangelical denominations tend to have a polity that mixes presbyterianism and episcopalianism? On the one hand they tend to have general councils/synods but on the other hand they have an elected leadership with a lot more power to it.
What do you think of the traditional way the Dutch reformed church did holy communion, it is called one cup communion, and go up to the table as a congregation, and eat of the bread and drink from one cup. A lot of Dutch reformed churches have gone away from this tradition in the past 60 years, and personally i think we should bring it back.
Did anything happen to your Discord server? You don't seem to be putting the invite link in your videos anymore. Could you please put the new link in your next video? God bless you brother.
in the apostolic age when the church was small, the apostles were the bishops as thery were overseeing congregations that were run by presbyters (priests) with Peter being the lead apostle having the final say. with passage of the apostles, presbyters moved into these offices to oversee affairs of areas, multiple congregations. this follows the set-up found to this day in the catholic church where at the parish level there is a priest in charge of the parish as a pastor with some assistants if needed. over a number of parishes there's a bishop. and presbyters were priests unlike the presbyterian presbyters that are not priests, so obviously and naturally Bread and Wine is just that, there is no change during the sacrifice at the Mass into Blood and Body of Christ.
The way I see separation of Church and State is to prevent theocracy like different countries had. But, people have stretched it to mean separation of religion and State, which was never against the rules.
Hello, are you sure the meaning of "Shabbat" is "Lord's day"? I by no means doubt Sunday is the day we should rest and go to church, but I looked for the etymology just to be sure and I found this: The word Shabbat derives from the Hebrew root ש־ב־ת. Although frequently translated as "rest" (noun or verb), another accurate translation is "ceasing [from work]."[4] The notion of active cessation from labour is also regarded[by whom?] as more consistent with an omnipotent God's activity on the seventh day of creation according to Genesis.
that was first creation. New Creation started with Jesus' resurrection (see also the quote on-screen). If you are just arguing how the Sabbath means "Lord's day," idk. Maybe because it says "the seventh day is the Lord's Sabbath" but that technically isn't necessarily a day.
@@Nguyenzander Yes, I'm only contesting the claim that Sabbath means "Lord's day". Citing Matthew 28:1 would have been a better argument than the apparent etymological root, which would be convincing too if it were accurate.
King Henry VIII was like: “Look at me. Look. At. Me. I’m the captain now.” Understand that Luther and Calvin had nothing to do with England turning Protestant. Henry did it just to divorce his wife, and then he kept all the hierarchy and many Catholic traditions.
@@NotAGoodUsername360 SON. Singular. Then, Bloody Mary made it Catholic again, and then Elizabeth put on a balancing act between Catholicism and the Calvinist Protestants that now had a foothold in England.
There is no apostolic succession in the Presbyterian Church 😂. That Video just shows, how much the guy wishes that his church would have apostolic succession and he now does mental gymnastics to ‚prove that‘.
The Anglican church is very much in between Reformed and Lutheran theology. For example the 39 Articles believe in a very Lutheran understanding of baptism and election
A question I often have as a Catholic is do you believe that the majority of Christians who have ever lived have been in jeopardy of damnation because of icons, prayers to saints, worship of the Eucharist, etc.? The answer I usually get is “Sola Fide and you’re cool” but that doesn’t seem to hold up if I’m putting my faith in bread? Interested to know your thoughts!
Congregationalism, not presbyterianism, is the representative democracy analog. Representatives have delegated authority from their constituents. They're members of their respective voting districts. Congregational elders, meeting in synod, are members of their churches rather than members of the synod. Presbyterianism is feudalism where a landed class of people (the presbytery) rule over their subjects (the laity). They're not members of the churches, they're members of presbytery. The congregationalists actually described their system as resembling a monarchy, democracy and aristocracy at the same time in different ways. This is in the Cambridge platform.
In the Dutch reformed church I go to, it is tradition to read the 10 commandments every Sunday, ive never seen it where we didn't. Also it seems we are the only churches that have 2 services on Sunday, but correct me if i any other churches do as well.
@@redeemedzoomer6053 young people are very black and white in their thinking. If you have pictures of family in your house who are Christians, you can call that an icon of a Saint in a very literal way. The authors of the Westminster confession were puritan spergs. I tend to leave my confessional documents to be the words of the creed. And everything else is fluid and up to individual interpretation.
How can the council of hieria be valid if both rome and the orthodox didn't show up? Cant pick and choose which councils are valid they all are or none are.
Question to any Lutherans out there, I've heard Lutherans make arguments tha could be interpreted as any of the 3 forms of government. Are there some Lutherans that are congregational?
Good arguments for the strength of the Presbyterian form of church government, however, why is the PCUSA where it is currently if that is its roots? Shouldn't the presbytery stop the liberal drift? What's to stop the authority of a denomination having a reverse effect on individual congregations? (bad authority forcing good churches to change)
Hey zoomer, as someone who considers themself ‘reformed’ in regard to theology, could you explain more in depth what you mean that Presbyterians are ‘apostolic’? A little confused on the matter.
Pretty good stuff! I'll offer a few minor critiques/corrections. 5:05 I wouldn't say that Presbyterians take sin more or less seriously than other Reformed groups (many of the Puritans were, after all, Congregationalists, and they have some of the strongest writings on sin and personal piety). It would be more accurate to say that our church government is the most consistent with the Reformed view of sin. 7:58 John Knox didn't make the Church of Scotland a Presbyterian church. You can argue (quite strongly) that Knox's convictions were Presbyterian (the 1560 Book of Discipline reflects some basic elements of Presbyterian polity). However, the Church of Scotland didn't become consistently Presbyterian until after Knox's death. His successors were instrumental in establishing Presbyterian government. We can rightly say that Knox brought Reformed Theology (in a holistic sense) to Scotland, but it's a bit inaccurate to say he made the Church of Scotland Presbyterian (though he was instrumental in laying the foundation). 8:00 The Scots Confession is NOT the best summary of Presbyterian theology. That honor goes hands-down to the Westminster Standards. It's one of the most rich, robust, and pastoral of the Reformed confessions. Any ambiguities are made unambiguous by the Larger Catechism, the authorized commentary on the Confession. The Westminster Standards stand as the greatest representative of mature Reformed thought. The Scots is alright, but it shows that its creation was somewhat rushed. It pales in comparison to its Reformed peers. The Belgic Confession (1561), for example, outdoes the Scots in every way. Plus, the Scottish Presbyterians replaced the Scots with the Westminster. I'd love to engage with you in defense of my stance on Westminster vs. Scots. 8:26 Presbyterians didn't invent Separation of Church and State (SC&S). SC&S began in Medieval thought ("The Defender of the Peace" by Marsiglio of Padua, to be precise). Luther and Calvin developed these ideas, but they didn't mean SC&S like we think of it today. Our modern conception of that is shaped by John Locke and Thomas Jefferson. You are right that the Reformed contributed to a proper Christian understanding of SC&S, but we didn't create it. It was around before Presbyterianism was "founded" in Scotland. See again Luther and Calvin, as well as the Anabaptists for the most radical articulation. 9:40 Good point with bringing up the Council of Hieria, but let's not forget the Synod of Elvira, which likewise condemned images of divinity roughly 500 years earlier.
@@arturmonteiro8541 It was effectively an ecumenical council until the idolaters at Nicaea II got their way (mostly for political reasons). His point is that Presbyterians would affirm the earlier, larger, and non-idolatrous council.
@@josephwolcott2544 It was in no way an "ecumenical" council. None of the 5 major patriarchs attended, it was used by the iconoclast Byzantine emperor. "idolators" at Nicaea II who affirm the worship if icons is wrong?
Don't know if you'll read this. But I saw that there was a conflict on your channel with some other Eastern Orthodox posters. I can't make apologies for anyone else, but I hope we're able to reach some kind of detente. I think you make good content, and I don't like seeing acrimony among different Christian communities. I hope this post does not offend you 🙏
So as non denominational we are still saved but we just worship wrong? Is that what you are saying? Not being confrontational just asking honestly. Thanks.
@@redeemedzoomer6053 it would be more prudent of me to say I haven’t witnessed it. I am new to reformed theology, and I don’t know how often it’s to be administered
@@redeemedzoomer6053 Question: you said you sent a 95 Theses to all PCUSA churches right? Is there a way I can DM you to know if they responded or is there a spreadsheet or anything?
Read the constitutional conventions debates and it will become pretty clear that the real father of the constitution wasn’t Madison (although his teacher was the Presbyterian theologian John Witherspoon) but the devout Congregationalist Roger Sherman
Could the phrases of reverent, solemn, and orderly be just white European/ American culture more than a biblical mandate? Is the American Black church in sin for being joyful and loud?
What is the difference between this and a Pentecostal church? not the Hill Song sort of Pentecostal, I go to a church that is one, but looks very 'church' like and there is some tongues that happens and a Shafar horn blown at times. Can get a bit crazy aha, but the spirit seems to be very present. My thoughts come more from how the disciples had Pentecost in the bible, I thought that maybe that was the first, but honestly just a spit-ball thought. I am very new to theology studies but find it all really fascinating and obviously wanna get things right before the end aha.
5:56 dont just say that add context, God wont punish you for being ignorant or oblivous to some things. aarons sons were basically serving God the wrong way, basically to put it in a way we understtand, midrepersenting God by offering foreign fire. we can misrepersent who God is when we worship him the wrong way. we must only worship God is what he has permitted.
I haven’t listened to the whole video yet but upfront, perhaps the foremost of the founding fathers, Thomas Jefferson, was a Unitarian and virtually despised Calvinism.
Reformed Zoomer I gotta ask I’ve seen a couple of titles that make me wonder: what is your stance on (American. Assuming you are an American based off various things you have said) politics and how do you think it affects your faith? I see you use the word “progressive” as a buzzword in what seems to be a negative connotation, and I’m just wondering the reasoning behind it
Where I struggle with the Presbyterian and Episcopal models is who should your church follow? The word of God or the Church leadership? If the Presbyterian Synod decides to officiate gay marriages what are you going to do? Some institutionalism is good and commanded, too much can lead followers astray. Congregationalism seems like a good middle ground.
Time for me to be the annoying "Um Actually" guy, since it's here that my Reformed Episcopalianism splits from Presbyterianism: If Presbyterian government is simply a polity in which there are not bishops but the presbyters of the churches govern together in regional units then many Lutherans in Europe and North America have had Presbyterian government. If Presbyterian government specifically requires the existence of the hierarchy of courts from Church/Kirk Session to Presbytery to General Assembly (potentially with synods in between) then Knox is not a Presbyterian as he kept to diocesan quasi-episcopal organisation with a superior office of superintendent over the other presbyters in each diocese, and he died in 1572 prior to the formation of Scotland's presbyteries in the 1580-90s. As he was dying he voiced support for accepting the decisions of the General Assembly of Leith, including the return of the office of bishop, contrary to the wishes of the faction that became Scottish Presbyterianism. This gets even more complicated when we find that the restored bishops supported and assisted the creation of the presbyteries, governing with and through them. This period of Scottish ecclesiastical history does not fit well into our later denomination categories. It is probably worth noting that many Episcopalians accepted that the New Testament church did not distinguish between bishops and presbyters, with the division emerging to hold the regional oversight previously exercised by the apostles to face the threats mentioned by Jerome.
why do your videos get so many dislikes? i have the return youtube dislikes addon and although its not exactly consistent i always notice on average a 50/50 l/d ratio (rn its at 711 likes and 919 dislikes) but ive always enjoyed your content and its because of your channel that i have found out so much about christianity when i was converting. its so strange to me how your content is so controversial, but all the comments are positive... either the addon is messing up or maybe someone is using dislike bots? idk
Hold up, Revelation 1:10 doesn't specify which day it's calling the "Lord's Day." Can you prove it's referring to Sunday rather than the seventh-day Sabbath?
