i agree and as a catholic I also think we should learn more about Protestants because a lot of Catholics think just think that there is Catholics and “Christian’s” and I think we should remove that label
I am a Catholic, and I must tell you that you and your channel have and has really helped me to grow and solidify in my faith. I often struggle with my beliefs, and I often find that your videos help to bring me back to my Christian and Catholic identity. For that, I thank you and wish you all the best my brother in Christ! Godspeed!
@@redeemedzoomer6053 These videos are amazing man. I personally am Catholic but I firmly believe that it doesn't matter what denomination you fall into, as long as you believe in the core tenants of Christianity, the Trinity, the death and resurrection of the Lord Jesus Christ, and follow the tenants of the Nicene Creed, you are saved. I claim to be Catholic but I am not sure if there is a better denomination that I would fall into as I do not believe in the infallibility of the papacy or in the church itself as a system run by man will always be subject to sin and corruption; however, I do believe in most other fundamentals of Catholicism and am curious as to your other disagreements with Catholicism.
As a (Southern) Baptist, I always try and push back against some of those in my denomination who say Catholics aren't Christian. I think that not only is it not true, but it's extremely hurtful and further divides the Church.
It is true. To be a Christian is to be a follower of Christ. Catholics serve way more than 1 master (Mary, the saints, the pope, I can keep going) and they add to the scripture with the Apocryphal books and other passages and REMOVE verses on predestination. Catholicism is a heresy and not true 100%. Of course, if they convert and leave Catholicism and believe the truth about the Bible, then they can become a born from above saved Christian.
In a weird way, I really want to be Catholic. I love the culture, the unity that Catholics have all around the world, I like the idea of letting the Church make decisions on big issues for me so I don't have to research it myself and love the idea of saints and the venerating of Mary. However, I just can't bring myself to believe in their doctrines, like Purgatory and the perpetual virginity of Mary- though of course, I am yet to do in-depth research on it. I believe that purgatory would be made more clear by Jesus if it was real, But in the parable of the 10 virgins, the virgins were either allowed into the celebration or blocked from entering it with no middle ground. This seems to be the case with many of His parables (Catholics feel free to correct me as I want to learn both sides). I have also been to Rome and the Vatican which are both truly beautiful and culturally rich places. Protestant nations don't seem to have the same zeal for God, it seems. The whole issue with all the protestant denominations gets to me though. Granted, many differences are incredibly minor and irrelevant honestly, but the fractures would be avoided if we were to be unified under one Church. I feel really drawn to Catholicism, but cannot be fully convinced that it is right either. May God guide us all to the truth. Love your videos!
Me and you both brother. We are fighting the same battle. Half of my family is Catholic and the other half are Protestant/Baptists. I love them both equally but as of right now I’m more Baptist than anything else. A lot about Catholicism has me thinking about turning into a Catholic but some of the traditions and biblical ideologies stop me from doing so. Hope we get the answers we need. God bless!
Personally, I don't believe in purgatory and don't think that the perpetual virginity of Mary is something crucial in my daily life with Christ. I focus on Jesus Christ alone because He clearly said He is the Way, the Truth, and the Life (John 14:6) and that we need a relationship with Jesus to see God. Heaven is God's kingdom and for God to know us, we must make ourselves know to Him by having a relationship with His Son Jesus Christ and obeying His Words found in the Bible. I think some of the extra-biblical doctrines or traditions won't jeopardize your salvation if your heart truly desires Christ and obedience to Him.
Its a common misunderstanding that purgatory is a middle ground in Catholicism between heaven and hell, but purgatory is actually a process to get into heaven, if you get to purgatory, you're getting into heaven. Purgatory is actually described in the Bible as purifying fire the soul must go through first, if you search for the Bible quotes for it there's plenty
@@jowar9958I will have a look then. I did know that purgatory was a place that cleanses any remaining sin from a believer before they enter Heaven, but no para les from what I have read seem to allude to such a place. Only that people are either instantly in or out. That id what I have gathered so far, at least
As a Protestant (Evangelical) living in the the one of the first Christian nations in Southeast* Asia (thanks to Catholicism), I have respect and love for my Catholic brethren. Edit: Asia to Southeast Asia to include other Asian countries Edit 2: Check below for the corrections
@@chillmemes5865 Oh Im sorry, I guess I meant to say Southeast Asia. In elementary and highschool, we were usually taught that-- Possibly because we usually see Asians within the stereotypical ethnicities and backgrounds. I think it was also a way we branded ourselves in history so the phrase stuck.
the other "why i'm not" videos are like 30+ minutes, this one is not even 7 if you consider his rambles, So yes, Zoomer is weeks away from converting to the one true church
As a Catholic, I have a few retorts. 1. Early Christians most certainly understood the papacy. I'm a little tired of protestant retconning of Early Church/Catholic history, because the early church was most definitely Catholic. Peter, - with the authority Christ gave him to loose and bind on heaven and earth, to forgive sins, and to cast out demons - ordained bishops, such as the patriarch of Antioch, and many priests were ordained by the apostles. Peter then appointed St. Linus as his successor, St. Linus was succeeded by St. Anacletus, and so on. Also, early Christians and the church fathers believed in the full presence of Christ in the eucharist, something which many protestants reject. And "sola scriptura" was something made up 500 years ago, and ironically has no biblical basis. The apostles, the first members of the church, wrote scripture, and the later church collected it and sifted out uninspired scripture. The apostles have authority, not their holy testimonies which are the evidence of that. 2. The Catholic Church, through its leadership, can make changes to practices, or explore/elaborate established beliefs, but to say Catholics "change the rules" and pretend they don't is somewhat disingenuous. Catholic Christians have had many councils to discuss and establish what is and isn't true, not to try and change the belief of what is true. The leader of the church, as a successor to Peter, can also command Christians to celebrate in a certain way, or to codify a certain truth. This isn't just Catholics making stuff up. 3. There is a one true Church, and it can't just be everyone who claims to be a Christian church. Different churches have different dogmas and beliefs, even if they're similar. The body of Christ, the means of salvation, cannot uphold both truth and lies. There is only one truth, and the kingdom of God is a bastion of truth. Anyway, I love your content, and I wish more people would watch your videos, because they really inspire a lot of people to look into the faith!
@@redeemedzoomer6053 you know Orthodox and Catholics both say that they were one church until the schism, right? that's not the right question to be asking
@@redeemedzoomer6053 The orthodox removed themselves from the original church when they decided to abandon the papacy for their own ways, the papacy was well established by the point of mutual excommunication, even if the orthodox tried to downplay it as "first among equals". Also, just because someone says something doesn't make it true. Truth is truth.
@American Mind do not. Orthodoxy is a schismatic sect. They split from Rome in 1054 mainly due to their rejection of the authority of the bishop of Rome. They accept his primacy but reject his jurisdiction over the entire Christian church when scripture wisdom of church fathers and the councils canons prove that the bishop of Rome had complete jurisdiction over every governing apostolic seat (Antioch Jerusalem Alexandria and Constantinople). If you seek the true church of Christ look to the catholic church
@@jeremyphilippe5122 I converted to catholicism last year. I started off distancing myself from Protestantism due to growing disillusioned with my former denomination of Presbyterianism. I can definitely see where you're coming from since mainline protestant churches have been growing very wack.
About "ugly" protestant churches: When Brazil became an Empire, in the 1800's, Catholicism was the official religion. However, due to friendship with the United Kingdom, Protestant immigrants could continue with their faith, following these rules: - It was not allowed to evangelize others - Public worship was not allowed - It was not allowed to build churches, as they could be confused as catholic churches. So, in Brazil it isn't very common to have traditional church buildings, even if there are historical denominations. It has become a form of distinction, and it is cultural in our region.
Eu achava que as igrejas feias dos evangélicos era por causa da maioria dos protestantes daqui serem das neopentecostais mais modernas, não sabia que era tão profundo.
Glad that Prots and Caths can finally have some good talks with each other. Hate seeing strawmanning and prot slander memes on Social media because it just leaves just an empty void of conversation between the two
Saying that Papal Infallibility was only really a thing since Vatican I is kinda true, but it's also kinda wrong. Yes, the dogma and doctrine of Papal Infallibility was added at Vatican I which was 1869-1870, but practically speaking Papal Infallibility was exercised semi-official by Popes ever since the late middle ages. Another point is the clarification of Papal Infallibility at Vatican II, which is not really a correction, rather a continuation of the debate at Vatican I as Vatican I was interrupted by the Franco-Prussian War and thus the debates and clarifications of Papal Infallibility were cut short.
Exactly and it’s also important to clarify that the main dogma would be the infallibility of the church itself in special cases, wich could than be further divided between papal infallibility, infallibility of counsels, ordinary / extraordinary magisterium and so on.. And the cases of infallibility are a lot less common than many Protestants seem to think.
Doesn’t mean it’s true. Papal infallibility is the biggest joke, I’m sorry, but it is. It’s laughable. Whatever the pope says goes and if he says something wrong, well it just wasn’t infallible, it wasn’t ex-cathedra, etc. You can use this type of reasoning to impose anything on your congregants and to “prove” anything. It’s not a real power. It’s not biblical. It was totally unknown to the apostles.
You are the only Protestant youtuber i frequently watch since you genuinely know what you're talking about and you don't accuse us Catholics of idolatry and Saint/Mary worship every 10 seconds like with some i had to interact with tend to do. Love your videos!
As a subscriber of yours, and as someone who converted to Christianity about this year and is currently considering catholicism(and already praying to the Virgin Mary), I really like your videos. I have many reasons to believe that catholicism is right(for example, the versicle when Jesus gives the Keys to Peter), but of course, I might be wrong. It's very hard to know for myself which denomination is right, since there are many arguments and counterarguments for each position, so it's hard to know the truth when there are so many opposite views. So, I just pray to God that, If I am not following the right path, if catholicism is wrong, then that the Lord get me out of the wrong path. About the Scripture thing, I have a question for you: Why do you believe that the Scripture has more authority than Church Tradition and the early church fathers, considering that the Bible itself was compiled by the church fathers?
The thing is, if you need the church to be there then the interpretation issue can be pushed back one level. How do you know if the Catholic Church is actually infallible if the scriptures, or anyone else, don't clearly state it? Can't you just interpret the words of the Catholic Church however you want? Scripture testifies itself to be the Word of God. It's undeniable. Protestants argue it's the only INFALLIBLE rule of faith. Protestants generally say that if the church makes a mistake then it's not binding and the scripture is the proper way to address it. If you look at the early councils, then you see that arguments aren't made on the basis of church authority. Rather they cite scripture. I think you should look at Gavin Ortlund's videos. I can't make a full essay on Catholicism on a RU-vid comment. Especially since I'm not nearly as qualified as actual theologians. Gavin makes a good case for Protestantism without knocking on Catholics personally. There's a good case to be made for Protestantism historically and biblically. Don't just look at pop level arguments in the same way a lot of atheists do.
as a Catholic, just a quick mention to *not* pray to Mary or the Saints or angels etc. you pray to God and God alone. we honor Mary and ask her to pray for us, not pray to her! praying the rosary and asking Mary to pray for us, on the other hand, are more than welcome!
@@b0rnless42 It does matter, and it matters a lot. But if you mean to say that being Christian is the most important thing, you're certainly right. Whether or not you should baptize your babies for their salvation is nothing in comparison to whether you should raise them to love the Lord or not.
The biggest differences I'd say is 'idol veneration' and 'Mary veneration' and 'apostolic succession' 'and 'magisterium' and that the 'pope' just made a new global climate '10 commandments' while on a trip with other nutcases to Mt. Sinai These are MAJOR differences.
I love watching your videos. I grew up half Presbyterian and half Catholic (though for some reason my mom felt compelled to have my siblings and baptized as Catholic even though her side is Presbyterian). I love them both to be honest! My Presbyterian grandparents even supported the orthodox ladies fundraisers when they sold pierogies for their church. We just grew up as viewing the main denominations as brothers and sisters in Christ❤ ❤❤🙏 God bless everyone!
I’m a young Catholic, and I do sometimes wonder about the papacy. I think our current pope has flaws, and is a little more left leaning than our last one, and I am also a huge conservative. I’ve been pretty confused recently, and this video was actually helpful. Thanks!
As a protestant, I would say this: dont give up on catholicism just yet. That's a good opportunity to acknowledge that we dont know everything about our particular christian denomination and to study more about it. Christinanity as a whole entails a pretty tough set of beliefes that are vastly counter intuitive to our everyday western mode of reasoning.
Well that’s the issue. You just gotta believe what Rome says. The doctrine of papal infallibility is useless. If they say something in error, they claim it wasn’t infallible. Sit ex cathedra? Infallible. You believe what they say you have to believe.
Skuawkers09 I don't know if you're struggling with the papacy in history or not, but I would suggest checking out "The Papacy" by Erick Ybarra, and for issues about the magisterium, Michael Lofton with reason and theology.
This video is gold. I love your pithy comments and no-nonsense approach. If you want some genuine perspectives from people from a Protestant faith tradition who eventually became Catholic, I recommend watching the Matt Fradd interview with Cameron Bertuzzi (Cameron Bertuzzi CONVERTS to Catholicism (Here's how it happened)) and reading "Rome Sweet Rome" by Scott Hahn. Not to say these will convert you, but they should give you some answers from people who have changed their minds while initially having similar objections.
Bro, I really really love your hard work for Christanity (I think I'm getting addicted to short videos about it, from you and some other creator like 'Impact Videos Ministries' XD). All of this is like medicament for church split. It's so amazing, I have no words to discribe how huge impact this can make for world- not only bc of wathing them, cuz ofc not everyone will, but because Christians that do can be inspired to spread love in different ways. As a polish catholic, I so much appreciate this effort
To me church unity and authority makes a lot of sense from the Bible. Christ gave us a church, not a book and it makes logical sense as well as biblical sense that Christ would establish and authority within the church to preserve sound doctrine an unity.
@@raphaelfeneje486 yea he did. The Bible was not even completed until the end of the 1st century and wasn’t agreed upon until the council of Rome in the 4th century
@@raphaelfeneje486 they were oral traditions passed on by the apostles to the Church. Not everything could be written down in the scriptures and most people could not read nor afford a copy of the Bible. Therefore many traditions and teachings some of which are also in scripture and some that aren’t were received as a part of the deposit of faith from the apostles
@@Justin-yn5py So can you show me from the mouth of the disciples or from their writings outside the Bible that supports that claim?? Seeing that some things were written and some not written. How do you know what wasn't written?? And why does the Bible say that anything aside the doctrine that has been written isn't of God??
The most important thing in the Catholic Church is the Eucharist so I wish you had addressed that, it would be interesting to see why you disagree with it and other teachings such as free will. Love your videos, they are always breath of fresh air after all the craziness of the internet!
Zoomer, how do you personally interpret the verses with keys to the kingdom, and founding the church on Peter? You just said there are a bunch of ways to interpret it without sharing yours. I totally expected you to. Any Protestants in the comments, feel free to share your interpretation. Zoomer made me realize I've never heard a Protestant explanation and I'm really curious. (Matthew 16:17-19)
lol i've asked this same question and I've had this range of responses: Jesus is the rock and Peter is an insignificant pebble We're all the rock (this made me laugh so much)
Papal Infallibility means that the Pope is protected from error when he proclaims by a definitive act a doctrine pertaining to faith or morals (CCC 891). This does not mean that he is impeccable (incapable of sin) or inerrant (incapable of error).
Sorry, what does that even mean. It just sounds like fancy mental gymnastics 🤸 can he err or not? If he can't, you can't really say he's human and in need of God.
@@mozphet3030Basically and I need to do more research on this, even as a Catholic. The Pope is only infallible if he is speaking about faith or morals, so if he says which team is going to win the Super Bowl, that’s not infallible, it’s his guess at best. When the pope does declare something “ex cathedra” meaning from the chair, but in this case “from the chair” means by whose authority he is speaking with. When the Pope does proclaim something that Catholics are bound to believe he has to do it in union with all the bishops as well, so he can’t just go hog wild or anything. In Isaiah 22 there is a foreshadowing of the papacy, Eliakim is given the keys to the house of David just how Jesus gave Peter the keys to the Kingdom of Heaven! If you have more questions I’ll do my best to answer!
@@mozphet3030 Pope is human. Pope is a sinner. Pope makes mistakes. "Papal Infallibility" only applies very rarely (it was used once in the past century).
I don't know about setting the peter/pope issue as the main problem. I see Justification via by Grace through faith in Christ alone being the main issue. we can't add to our justification righteousness via our works.
Where does the Bible say you are saved by faith alone? Only place in the Bible I could find the words “faith” and “alone” in the same sentence is in James where it explicitly teaches that we are not saved by faith alone.
@@Justin-yn5pyin the book of James in which it says "faith without works is dead" oke so: The works there is the *fruit* or evidence that you have been saved which comes out naturally it happens *after* conversion Its basically like Cain and Abel They both offered sacrifices to God -Abel had a relationship with God and gave Him his best sacrifices as the fruit of it. And God is pleased with his fruit -Cain did not have a relationship with God and as a result, he offered unwholeheartedly. And in the end (it gets really messy) Hopefully Im not making offense I was confused before by the verse until I did some cross context
@@_______9427 James 2:24 literally says you are not saved by faith alone. Also if faith without works is dead then that means merely believing doesn’t guarantee salvation. I agree there is no specific amount of works or anything like that can save us, but we just abide in Christ to increase our justification. It’s a process not a one time thing
@@Justin-yn5py I agree that it is a process and faith is like a muscle we should exercise. Heb 11:1 can give the definition of faith But book of James does not talk about the salvation of man: James 2:24 - Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only. (There is no statement that salvation needed works) And there is also in the Catholic Bible itself that states that: Ephesians 2:8-9 "For by grace you have been saved through faith, and it is not from you; it is a gift from God; it is not from works, so no one may boast" After believing and repenting that is where the Spirit enables us to do good works (fruits of Holy Spirit) in which we havent done before(book of Corinthians) Thats is a good argument tho its quute interesting
I was raised catholic, but I did get baptized again as an adult to renew and affirm my commitment to Christ. I strongly believe in reconciling the different churches that exist today and believe that both modern day protestants and modern-day Catholics can learn from each other. Christians all around should strictly focus on spreading the Gospel rather than attacking each other on beliefs and practices outside of the ones shared by most Christians. For example, I like the structure of a Catholic service, but enjoy preaching the Gospel publicly using amplified sound. Once the whole world was conquered for Christ, then we can sit down and discuss our differences. The modern world is suffering and needs Christ more than ever. Focus on spreading the gospel of Jesus Christ and preaching against sin. We have a duty to glorify God in our daily lives in every little thing that we do.
Now I say to you that you are Peter (which means ‘rock’), and upon this rock I will build my church, and all the powers of hell will not conquer it. - Matthew 16:18
i really liked the video i would say that the church does focuses on early church fathers but on the latin fathers who formed the theological view of western Christianity and the modern papacy they were primarily roman. god bless
I respect you and your mission, but that’s not an accurate representation of St. John Henry Newman’s theory nor the First Vatican Council. JHN states that the doctrine papacy is found visibly in the early Church, and V1 is not the first definition of papal infallibility. Papal infallibility was defined at the Fourth Lateran Council and the Council of Florence (and was believed by the Early Church Fathers such as St. Augustine).
Trying to watch your videos seriously but reading "headstock was slain by Dogagie using [Circumciser]" Had me in tears, lol. if you are wondering when the text appear is around 4:57
why is this getting such a terrible dislike ratio? i genuinely dont understand. is it frustrated catholics, frustrated protestants, or angry atheists? no clue. regardless, i thought this was great ( as a catholic). keep up the great, unifying work.
Catholic here. I have a lot of respect for you and many other protestants. I learning about the many traditions in Christianity. I might disagree some with every tradition, but I find the intellectuals of the Faith: Catholic, Orthodox, and Protestant strengthen my own faith than hinder it!
Hi Catholic here. I just want to point out that we take our teachings and doctrines from Scripture. We don't just rely on the early Church fathers. Sacred Tradition and Sacred Scripture! (Not trying to condemn or judge or anything just wanted to point that out!). I say this because I feel like the Catholic Church gets accused of not relying on Scripture at all and that we don't take the Word of God seriously. Also talking about your point on the Papacy is nowhere in Scripture. I know you touched on the point of Jesus saying to Peter, "Upon this rock I will build my Church" and giving him the keys of the Kingdom. But it is also referenced in Thessalonians 2:15 which states, "5 So then, brothers and sisters, stand firm and hold fast to the teachings[a] we passed on to you, whether or by letter."
"The successions of the bishops of the greatest and most ancient church known to all, founded and organized at Rome by the two most glorious apostles, Peter and Paul, that church which has the tradition and the faith which comes down to us after having been announced to men by the apostles. With that church, because of its superior origin, all the churches must agree, that is, all the faithful in the whole world, and it is in her that the faithful everywhere have maintained the apostolic tradition” (Saint Irenaeus, Against Heresies 3:3:2 [A.D. 189]).
So I am evangelical/baptist-leaning and I laughed reallyyyy hard at "protestant church is just in the back of an Applebee's". 😂😂😂 I absolutely love my church and I do think it's beautiful even though it's not traditional...but it's so true that we'll have church anywhere...and I think it's good to be able to laugh at ourselves 😂. Love your content!!
very nice bro but you forget that the chatolic was the first one (historically) and all the saints, miracles and good actions the church (chatolic) made. btw your videos are really good! a lot of respect for my brothers protestants
I think people should read Erick Ybarra's The Papacy to show that the Papacy is Biblical and Historical, he quoted one Anglican scholar in the book saying that by Pope Leo in the 4th century you essentially had Vatican I papal claims.
Catholic here, happy to watch your videos and hear your point of view. You have an inspiring faith journey and a realistic ambition for bringing God's Kingdom here. While each Church is a House of God, some of ours look... Applebeean, for sure. The late 20th century was tough on all of us. St. Thomas the Apostle, Patron Saint of architects, pray for us!
Focus on appearance is a worldly trait. God sees us not for how we appear to others but our true character. You should see a church not for the masonry or paneling but the works they do in a community that demonstrate they are saved and made capable of good works through the holy spirit. I would take the "church in the back of an applebees" that conducts ministry over a Joel Olsten private island sanctuary where there are only Christians.
I'm born and raised and professing Roman Catholic, I do get your criticism of the infallibility of the Pope meaning the infallibility of the Church and so on. Well evidently the Church is not inerrant as abhorrent things have been committed in the name of the Lord and the Church (inquisition, forced conversion, selling of indulgences without explaining what exactly they are...) But the Church is in my opinion infallible in "the long run". Throughout the centuries and dozens of Schisms the Catholic Church has been consistently united under one hierarchy which means there is less leeway to create divisions. Yes it can be tyrannical but that just further proves the action of the Holy Spirit in guiding the Church through the rule of +250 popes. Finally I have to add that I don't particularly agree with some positions of the Church (especially ministy of women, as I see no basis for such an exclusion in scripture and I believe that tradition should be viewed critically if it's not beneficial to the continuation of God's path to the Salvation of the World). Overall great video and thanks to you I now am starting to have a lot more admiration for real protestant Christians who defend the Faith.
Come Home to Rome brother! Book recs: >"The Case for Catholicism" by Trent Horn >"Practical Theology" by Peter Kreeft Also thank you for saying it's not Heretical & that we're doing the best for the Culture!
I just want to thankyou for anwsering both my questions from QnA, I was a bit disappointed that you didnt get to them in QnA video, but seeing both questions anwsered in separate videos (other one is Christian dating) is very much appracieated. thankyou.
Hey, so as a Catholic I will say that you're right about some things, like the Church not being totally consistent throughout history and the fact that papal infallibility wasn't developed fully until Vatican I. However, when you say the doctrine of the papacy isn't really found in the Church fathers' writings, that's not exactly true. Let me shed some light with some examples: St. Irenaeus of Lyons (c. 130-202 AD) - In his work "Against Heresies" (Book 3, Chapter 3), Irenaeus discusses the apostolic tradition preserved in the Church of Rome, which he sees as founded by Peter and Paul. He emphasizes the importance of the Church of Rome, stating, "It is necessary to obey those who are the presbyters in the Church, those who, as I have shown, possess the succession from the apostles; those who, together with the succession of the episcopate, have received the certain mark of truth according to the will of the Father... For it is a matter of necessity that every Church should agree with this Church, on account of its preeminent authority." St. Cyprian of Carthage (c. 200-258 AD) - In his letter to Antonianus (Letter 55), Cyprian refers to the Church of Rome as the Chair of Peter, stating, "There is one God and one Christ, and one Church, and one Chair founded on Peter by the word of the Lord. It is not possible to set up another altar or for there to be another priesthood besides that one altar and that one priesthood. Whoever gathers elsewhere scatters." St. Ambrose of Milan (c. 339-397 AD) - Ambrose, in his commentary on the Gospel of Luke (6:97), touches upon the significance of Peter's role and, by extension, the role of his successors. He highlights Peter's confession of faith as the foundation upon which the Church is built, underscoring the unique position of Peter among the apostles. In other writings he also describes the "Chair of Peter" as representing the Pope's position. St. Augustine of Hippo (354-430 AD) - Augustine, in his Sermon 295, reflects on the symbol of the keys given to Peter in Matthew 16:18-19 and sees in Peter's primacy a figure for the authority of the Church. He mentions, "For it was not said to him alone, ‘You are Peter’; but, ‘and upon this rock I will build my Church.’ Thus, he represented the Church, which is built upon the rock, and received ‘the keys of the kingdom of heaven.’" St. Jerome (c. 347-420 AD) - In his letters, particularly Letter 15 (to Pope Damasus I), Jerome affirms the primacy of the Bishop of Rome by expressing his adherence to Damasus's teaching and authority, stating, "I speak with the successor of the fisherman, and the disciple of the cross. I, following none as my chief but Christ, am associated in communion with your Beatitude, that is, with the chair of Peter. Upon that rock, I know the Church is built." These references, among others, illustrate how the Early Church Fathers viewed the role of the Pope, the Bishop of Rome, as a successor to Peter, affirming the special authority and foundational role of Peter and his successors in maintaining the unity and continuity of the Church. Of course, this interpretation wasn't unanimous across all the early Church fathers, but it was widespread enough that the Pope's role became increasingly important as the Church grew. According to my understanding some of the fathers viewed Peter's confession of faith as the rock upon which the Church is built, whereas others viewed Peter himself as the rock (and by extension the papacy). Anyway, thanks for the thoughtful conversations. Keep up the good work.
After listening to Trent Horn for a minute and I think I might be mostly sold on catholics. I am starting to believe in the papacy. Clearly Jesus had a hierarchical structure. This among the many other reasons.
@@endygonewild2899 If you watch Gavin Ortlund Vs Trent Horns debate on Sola Scriptura you will start to see how dominating Catholic doctrine is. I went into the debate open minded and came out a much deeper Catholic.
@@Jimmy-iy9pl sola scriptura is a laughable doctrine. It’s completely circular and the Bible explicitly rejects it in 2nd Timothy. Nowhere does Bible say sola scriptura and non of the early church fathers believed in it
Authority is the point, theologically. Leadership is essential, practically. Infallibility cannot be possible regarding the Bible unless an infallible method (the Church) was used by God to reveal biblical truth. Sin is real even within the Church but God knew that. He works through faithful people (saints) in spite of great sinfulness in every age. The Catholic Church can be likened to Noah’s arc in which many animals likely made the conditions unpleasant. The only way Catholics can bear the stench on the inside is to remember the storm on the outside. Be a saint!
I'm an atheist and I love learning about beliefs people have and why they have them, and I just love this guy so much, he's so genuine and just interesting to watch, he's 100% got a sub from me.
As someone who just identifies as Christian (not Protestant or Catholic, but still holds more Protestant views) the ONLY THREE THINGS I have against Catholics is the praying to the saints (which I personally see as Idolatry), the need for Catholics to confide their sins to a priest as children (I went to a Catholic school for the first few years of my school, but when it came to that my mom got pissed off), and also the fact that you are expected to call priests father when I believe you only have to fathers (our Heavenly Father and earthly biological father). Other then that we’re ALL Christian’s and in the “progressive” world we live in now we all need to come together as brothers and sisters in Christ. As a teenage Christian it’s soooooo nice to find a fellow Gen Z Christian who truly loves God. God bless everyone! ❤
In regards to praying to Saints, we ask for their intercessory prayers. In Revelation theres mention of the prayers of Saints and in James it states to “pray for one another” and that the “prayer of a righteous person is powerful.” Praying isn’t necessarily worship, since prayer has multiple definitions. In context pf praying to the Saints we are making an earnest hope or wish that they pray for us to God, for instance in the Hail Mary prayer we ask “Pray for us Sinners, now and at the hour of our death.” Notice how the words say “pray for us,” and not to Her. Idolatry is the worship of deities (i.e. gods with a lowercase g). We don’t consider saints as dieties, since they’re not gods, but merely humans. In regards to confessing to a priest, we do that because according to scripture, in James 5:16 it states “confess your sins to one another.” Also in the Old Testament people confessed their sins to a priest. As for calling our pastors Father, you’re forgetting that afterwards Jesus said “Call no man teacher,” so if we were to take that literally what would we call our teachers? These are just some explanations for why things are in the Catholic church and are in no way meaning to try to change your mindset or anything, its just important to see our side of the story. God bless 🙏✝️
@@justin36004you know that theres not even one example of people praying to deceased saints in the bible right ? When the bible speak of saints it always mean Christians that are alive like even some catholics admit that theres no biblical support for that doctrine so they rely on tradition and on the church.
@@lad6524 The Saints are alive and well in heaven. They aren’t deceased. Plus theres references in Hebrews, Revelation, and in the deuterocanonical books about prayers to the saints.
Before writing my arguments I want to say that I discovered your channel some days ago, and I have liked it very much. As a christian who does not use his entire day to scan the web for christianity videos, I must say that yours have quite literally mesmerized me. So, I wanted to answer to your video, even though I don't usually write comments. I can see very well you concern with church infallinility, but we firstly need to imagine christianity in the early ages. There was this man called Jesus who professed himself as the son of God, and performed miracles wherever He went. So, understandably, after this man died and was resurrected people tried to understand what just happened and they wanted to follow his teachings. There was only one problem: the direct sources about his teachings weren't enough, so, like a kind of detective squad, they had to investigate to comprehend Him. So they argued about anything: from wich gospels were real, to what excactly was He on the Earth for, and every kind of question somebody could come up for after witnessing the literal son of God. They did all of that in councils, wich are non other than just a big debate over what happened in those 33 years. The wisest men were summoned, and after years they come up with the solution, and declared them dogmas, wich some protestant churches still follows. Fast forward a bit, and there are tens of council, with new and new dogmas, because God is such a vast topic that cannot be debated over a single council. And in the meantime the debaters evolved: from early church fathers to scholasticism to today theologians. About your concern over personal theology, we must understand that the Truth is one and one only, so he cannot be interpreted in other ways; the path to God is one and one only. That's why when new dogmas are added there is less freedom of thought about theology: because those are questions already answered by the wisest men of that time, wich knew way more than me or you. Though, on open topic, not answered yet we can share our own personal vision. Then, about the pope, we must not forget that the pope is enlighted by Jesus, who promised to lead his church; but that does not mean that he is always right, he is still human, and that's why there are criterias for invoking papal infallibility (wich, by the way, has been invoked only 2 times in all of church's history). Then, as you said in the early fathers there are only a tiny part of modern catholic doctrines, and that's because, as I have explained earlier, they didn't know what they were talking about and had to find out, arguing, debating, bit by bit, to eventually build modern catholic theology. Finally, about the bible, catholics don't use it as the main source simple because the bible was created by the church, according to its theology, excluding books that were against what church fathers tought were not Christ's teachings (apocrypha). That's the same thing protestant did during the reformation to justify their theology, even though that meant modifying the bible to better be compatible with their ideas and not the contrary. Quick round: As I have knowledge, the Church didn't modify any of his teachings
In Norway, what I really like about the Catholic Church is that it is really based. It is totally aware of the concept of wokeness, and what wokeness is really about. This sadly lacks in the Norwegian Church, especially the Norwegian State Church which now hangs up prideflags with Jesus on it in the front beside the altar.. *sigh..*
As a Catholic, I would like to share my point of view as to why the papacy is a must. If there is a Pope, who can make clear statements about what is right and wrong regarding our theological beliefs, then we would live up to our name, as "catholic" means "united". If our faith is left up to our interpretation, we risk interpreting scripture wrong. In that case, it is possible to hold heretical ideas. It is precisely because the Pope can unite the theological understanding of believers that I find the Pope to be necessary. However, a college of Bishops is also fine. The important part about the papacy, in my opinion, is that there is a ruling authority who can clear up confusing parts of our faith.
I think you are misunderstanding the doctrine of the papacy. I recommend you google "what to do if you disagree with a church teaching catholic answers". There is an article by catholic answers that explains the church's teaching authority very well. It is ok to disagree with some things and there are varying levels.
It's highly amusing to always see the Catholics here (as I'm one myself) all thinking how "Catholic" Redeemed Zoomer seems. I see it too. But I think the reason we all think that, is that as Catholics, we aren't as deep into the nitty-gritty of theology like Zoomer (and Presbyterians generally are). So he sees important differences that we gloss over. Also, for us born into it, it's easier to live Catholicism on a spectrum -- once we're Confirmed, we're still Catholics whether or not we agree with the Pope on every little thing with regards to Church rules; if we feel bad about missing fasting during Lent, we can just go Confess! :) We know the Pope, while respected, is actually almost never speaking infallibly. We may be Lambs of God, but we are not all Sheep of the Clergy! But for Zoomer, coming to it as an adult, I can understand how he really needs to feel he has to be able to intellectually accept the whole official package before choosing a faith.
The doctrine of the papacy may be the most distinctive Catholic doctrine, but it’s not the central doctrine. The central doctrine is that of apostolic succession generally, with the Magisterium having authority to teach infallibly on matters of faith and morals using sacred scripture and tradition as deposits of faith. The papacy, while distinctive, is actually secondary to this.
“But since it would be too long to enumerate in such a volume as this the succession of all the churches, we shall confound all those who, in whatever manner, whether through self-satisfaction or vainglory, or through blindness and wicked opinion, assemble other than where it is proper, by pointing out here the successions of the bishops of the greatest and most ancient church known to all, founded and organized at Rome by the two most glorious apostles, Peter and Paul, that church which has the tradition and the faith which comes down to us after having been announced to men by the apostles. With that church, because of its superior origin, all the churches must agree, that is, all the faithful in the whole world, and it is in her that the faithful everywhere have maintained the apostolic tradition” (Against Heresies 3:3:2 [A.D. 189]).
I have much respect for catholicism and tradition coming from a protestant background. I have many catholic friends and acquaintances as well as protestant ones and both can be similar in zeal. My only drawback personally in joining catholicism is that, while I understand many catholics say they "venerate" Mary, it's apparent it borders on idolatry (as well as some saints). I sympathize with the hesitancy of believing an infallible papacy also.
Catholics do believe in salvation by grace through faith alone; it's commonly misinterpreted but what Catholics really believe is the "OBEDIENCE OF FAITH" (Romans 1:16-17). We don't really have faith if we don't have the faith to follow God's law.
@@redstarshard The Council of Trent formally announced the doctrine of justification by grace through faith alone, and all those who follow it, to be *anathema.* To say Catholics formally don't believe in that, which is the gospel of Jesus Christ, is an understatement.
I believe that whether we are Catholics or Christians we should focus on Jesus Christ for our salvation and Him alone. By be guided by the Holy Spirit.
I think it’s important to not get lost in religion and rally focus on Jesus and build a relationship with God through the Holy Spirit. Literally the reason Jesus came was because of the hardened hearts of religious Jews.
I would like to see Redeemed Zoomer talk to Scott Hahn ( a former presbyterian minister turned catholic theologian). He convinced Capturing Christianity to be Catholic.
