Papacy is rooted in Solomon’s temple. I wish more of us Catholics would grab a hold of this, to show how biblical it is. It’s not just a mere development of pragmatism and convenience. It’s truly part and parcel of the fabric of the temple worldview. You guys did a fantastic, thorough job!
@@DixonCameronS amen brother. My channel is heavily built upon how the church fulfills the temple. You might like the Content! I just interviewed Michael yesterday too!
It is important to bear in mind that the convictions of the Church Fathers in the first centuries of the Church were held in a time in which truth was being tested by persecution and martyrdom. They were not theological dilettantes..
Two saints that are venerated in both the West and *the East.* 1. *St. Maximus the Confessor* "How much more in the case of the clergy and Church of the Romans, which from old until now, as the elder of all the Churches which are under the sun, *presides over all?* Having *surely received this canonically, as well from councils and apostles, as from the princes of the latter [Peter & Paul],* and being numbered in their company, *she is subject to no writings or issues of synodical documents, on account of the eminence of her pontificate, even as in all these things all are equally subject to her according to sacerdotal law"* [PL 129.585-6]. "[For] he is only wasting words who thinks he must convince or lure such people as myself, instead of satisfying or entreating *the blessed Pope of the most holy Catholic Church of Rome, that is, the Apostolic throne, which is from the incarnate Son Himself and which, in accordance with the holy canons and the definitions of faith, received from all the holy councils universal and supreme dominion, authority, and power of binding and loosing over all the holy churches of God which are in the whole world.* For with it the Word who is above the celestial powers binds and looses in heaven also. For if he thinks he must satisfy others, and fails to implore the most blessed Roman Pope, he is acting like a man who, when accused of murder or some other crime, does not hasten to prove his innocence to the judge appointed by law, but only uselessly and without profit does his best to demonstrate his innocence to private individuals, who have no power to acquit him from the accusation" [PG 91.141-146]. 2. *St.Theodore the Studite* "[To the Pope Leo III] ... I borrow now the cry of the coryphaeus of the apostles, calling Christ to his assistance when the waves of the sea had surged upwards, and I say to your Christ-imitating Beatitude: O arch-shepherd of the church which is under heaven, save us now; we perish. Imitate Christ your Master; stretch out your hand to the Church which is among us as he stretched out his hand to Peter ... Emulate, we beg you, the great pope whose name you bear, and just as he, when the heresy of Eutyches appeared, stood erect spiritually as a lion with his dogmatic letters, so in your turn (I dare to say it because of your name) roar divinely, or rather send forth your thunder against the present heresy. For if they, usurping an authority which does not belong to them, have dared to convene a heretical council, whereas those who follow ancient custom do not even have the right of convening an orthodox one without your knowledge, it seems absolutely necessary, we dare to say to you, that your *divine primacy* should call together a lawful council, so that the Catholic dogma may drive out heresy and that your primacy may neither be anathematized by these new voices lacking authority, nor may wills disposed to evil find in this adulterous council an excuse for being involved in sin. It is in order *to obey your divine authority as chief pastor* that we have set forth these things as it befitted our nothingness, we the least members of the church. For the rest, we beg Your Holiness to count us among your sheep and to enlighten and strengthen us by your holy prayers ... my father and companion the monk, as well as my brother the archbishop of Thessalonica, are imprisoned on other islands. *But they say the same things that I do, and with me they prostrate themselves at the sacred feet of Your Beatitude"* [PG 99.1017-21]. *"To the most holy father, leading luminary of the universe, our lord and master, the apostolic pope* ... From the height of heaven the glittering sun of the morning has sent us its rays; Christ our God has established Your Beatitude in the west on the first apostolic throne as a divine torch for the illumination of the church which is under heaven ... we learned from our brethren, who had been sent to you, all the great things said and done by your holy headship. You did not admit the heretical deputies into your presence, but sent them away when they were still far away ... you sympathized with our misfortunes as with the misfortunes of your own sheep, as our letters were read and our messengers heard without delay. And we lowly monks indeed recognize as a manifest successor of the coryphaeus of the apostles the [bishop] who presides over the Church of Rome, and we are certain that God has not abandoned the church of our country, because divine providence has reserved His assistance for it since the beginning ... which He gives by you and by you alone. For from the beginning, you are the ever pure and ever limpid stream of orthodoxy; you are the tranquil harbor where the whole church finds sure shelter against all the tempests of heresy, you are the citadel chosen by God to be the assured refuge of salvation" [PG 99.1153-6]. "Byzantium has shaken off the yoke of the gospel as a heifer pricked by the goad; she shakes off the harness. She is furiously agitated like the Corybantes; she is intoxicated with blood as a lioness; as the serpent she stops her ears; she kicks against the censure. *A voice made itself heard to warn her, equal to a voice from heaven - the voice of the supreme throne of Rome:* ‘what have you done? You have denied Christ by forbidding his image, that of the Mother of God and all the saints ... Open your ear to obedience; listen to the words of the gospel, an apostle, a prophet, a father.’ But Byzantium did not listen, did not receive those words. She raised her head against almighty God, outraging Christ and trampling upon his chosen saints..." [PG 99.1280].
As an ex-protestant I really wish other protestants would listen to these types of d discussions, because if u can see the papcy being true right away from the beginning of ur studies then its going to be alot easier to see the harder issues like the Eucharist. because once I realize once saved always saved is false, and then I realize the Eucharist is true, and everything else is biblical, and it really was the papacy for me being the final thing that I need to see, to be a Catholic. Listening to conversations like these really helps us Protestants to see a diff point of view. Cuz its true the majority of Christian 2day, will say they know the Bible, but they don't know first century Jewish culture, and what they did before, they can't see what words mean in Jewish culture, but then they can understand we have ebonics today in r language, it's ridiculous to think that the Jews didn't have didnt have the same type of language.
I'm a Protestant and I found this utterly unconvincing. It seemed like college students who all agreed with each other sitting the dorm common room talking about politics. Did they really need nearly three hours to deal with Dr. Ortlund's much-shorter video?
@@toddthacker8258 but it wasn't my job to make it sound convincing. But it looks like you didn't even watch the video. They're the ones that actually give you the evidence here, so that you can study on your own. And that's what everybody needs to do, obviously including Protestants...
@@onlylove556 "You'd agree with me if only you studied" isn't a very convincing argument, but be well. This video reeks of arrogance and condescension. Difficult to persuade from such a point, even if you are absolutely correct on the merits.
@@toddthacker8258 like i said you're entitled to your own opinion, no1 is forcing u to believe in Catholicism. I still hold to my original statement. That I wish all protestants would actually study more on the early apostolic church fathers. To actually listen, & learn from Catholic theologians; Let me defend themselves.... Bc the evidence for Catholicism is overwhelming....
I remember listening to a podcast long ago that involved a Protestant convert to Catholicism. I have forgotten who it was, but his comments have stuck with me. On papal infallibility, he said, and I'm paraphrasing, "To many Protestants, papal infallibility is seen as a super power that the Pope possesses. So, Catholics spreading the faith should keep this in their thoughts. Instead, papal infallibility should be seen as safeguard, a protection on the chair, by God. The Holy Spirit is constantly at work."
Fantastic job by everyone. The recent show on PWA with Scott Hahn and Cameron was excellent too. I feel like with the surge in RUclips Catholic apologetics we may see a wave of protestants converting in the next several years. Honestly, I feel like the case for the papacy is airtight, but on a human level it can be difficult for people for a variety of reasons (submitting to authority, friends/family, etc.).
@@yajunyuan7665 By what authority do *you* determine who does or doesn't have the gifts of the apostles and prophets? With all due respect, brother, who died and made *you* the Magisterium?
@@yajunyuan7665 LOL, OK, so what? I'm thinking you may not understand what the papacy and Magisterium even *are.* Michael has some good videos explaining all that stuff, if you're interested. ;) And BTW....your "observations" are entirely subjective, fallible, and open to debate. They are far from authoritative, and that's an understatement. I asked you "by what authority." you were making your sweeping claims. You answered, "observation," but that's not an answer. Not even close. Other people's observations differ from yours. Dramatically in many cases. So, who decides who's right? Who's the arbiter? Not you, my brother. You're not above it all. Again, nobody died and made you the Magisterium. Obviously, your observations have no binding authority behind them. That's the whole issue. Authority. There *is* a divinely instituted Teaching Authority. You aren't it. And yeah, neither am I. That's why I defer to the Authority Jesus Himself established: "the Church, the pillar and ground of the Truth." Bottom line: What makes *your* observations correct versus anyone else's? Again, "by what authority" do you make your claims?
This is so excellent. As someone who lives near a Word-of-Faith / NAR / Catch-the-Fire adherent, I have certainly seen the pitfalls of Sola Scriptura up-close and personal!
I disagree that the keys were given to all of the apostles. The power of the keys, yes, but not the keys themselves. The Catechism (CCC 553) confirms this: "553 Jesus entrusted a specific authority to Peter: "I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven." The "power of the keys" designates authority to govern the house of God, which is the Church. Jesus, the Good Shepherd, confirmed this mandate after his Resurrection: "Feed my sheep." The power to "bind and loose" connotes the authority to absolve sins, to pronounce doctrinal judgments, and to make disciplinary decisions in the Church. Jesus entrusted this authority to the Church through the ministry of the apostles and in particular through the ministry of Peter, the only one to whom he specifically entrusted the keys of the kingdom." The last sentence says the keys were only given to Peter.
You are definitely not alone. St. Eulogius of Alexandria "Neither to John, nor to any other of the disciples, did our Savior say, 'I will give to thee the keys of the Kingdom of Heaven,' but only to Peter" [Eulogius, Lib. ii. Cont. Novatian. ap. Photium, Biblioth, cod. 280].
John the Apostle acknowledge Peters primacy: John recount the events of that Easter morning when he and Peter were allerted that the tomb in which Christ was burried, was found to be empty. John the younger apostle despite him outrunning Peter merely peered into the tomb then stepped back, to allow Peter his leader to step in and carry out a systematic formal enquiry; examine the facts before drawing any conclusions. Both John and Peter implicitly conclude that the body of Christ was stolen, wherefore they ended their investigation and went home!
The Church and her doctrines naturally developed over time. If it were to have all the answers in its infancy, there may be no need for the guidance of the Holy Spirit.
Why even believe in Ortlund, can his opinions over come the 2000 year old history of the church...with it's church fathers, doctors of the church, learned men throughout history, a church that has preserved and protected the words of the scripture for centuries.
@@jasonkirklin2263 True.... The church and the church fathers has warned and battled against heresies even in the earliest of times....and 2000 years later the church still stands as it had from the beginning. ".....gates of hell will not prevail" Through out Christian history, thousands of learned and holy men has gone though every millimeter of the bible, all questions have been asked and answered and the Magisterium of the Catholic Church is church's authority to give authentic interpretation of the Word of God, "whether in its written form or in the form of Tradition." - No one man's opinion can change these facts. The church is whole, the Pope, the bishops, the priest, the sacraments, 73 books of the bible, it's catechism, it's saints, it's traditions, it's holidays, etc... The largest Christian church 1.3 B Catholics, - it prays and speak in all languages, it's 200,000+ parishes, 400,000 priest, 5,000 bishops - It is a force of good to the world. The Church operates more than 140,000 schools, 10,000 orphanages, 5,000 hospitals and some 16,000 health clinics. Caritas, the umbrella organization for Catholic aid agencies, estimates that spending by its affiliates totals between £2 billion and £4 billion a year, making it one of the biggest aid agencies in the world. - Every day the church feeds, cloths, shelters and educates more people than any other organization in the world - “I have been to some truly dark places where the suffering would be hard for most Americans to imagine,” said Nikki Haley, former U.S. Ambassador to the United Nation. And who did she find there? The Catholic Church, doing “everyday miracles,” and “helping millions of desperate people.”
As my Byzantinist husband would say, there's scant (extant) evidence for *anything* from antiquity! All historians of antiquity recognize this -- it's a real challenge. Historians of World War II do not face this challenge, LOL. But historians dealing with the ancient / early patristic world do.
There are reams of evidence and an unbroken line of living memory by early Christian’s concerning authority. Dr Ortlund thinks he has wriggle room because the word “papacy” was not used to describe the office and even if it was, he would find some way to deny the office. I feel safe saying that because St Peter says in scripture Noah and those with him were saved through water and baptism, being like this, now saves you also. Baptists do not believe this and do all sorts of contortions to negate the teaching, seemingly to separate themselves from the ancient faith. Dr Ortlund can be quite gracious and I admire his bravery swimming with these intellectual sharks. He thinks he has a can of shark repellent, but it’s actually filled with blood.
Hey Michael! I'm actually pretty new to the channel (been following mostly videos regarding protestants), I have a question for you, perhaps you could explain this to me. Why does an "act" of contrition require contrition but the sacrament of confession only attrition? Also is an "act" of contrition merely being contrite or does it require an action or prayer.
In John 21:7 we see John allert Peter that Christ was on the beach, implying that because Peter is the leader of the twelve, he needed to be the first to reconcile with Jesus. Note Peter changed his clothing and rushed to meet Christ on the beach.Christ wasted no time to question Peters motives of credibility, upon which his shepherdship is affirmed.
There also seems to be some parallels between the Council of Jerusalem in (Acts 15) with the Council of Jerusalem in (1 Chronicles 28) - in terms of its hierarchical structure.
@@yajunyuan7665 First, any divine command that comes later modifies divine commands that came earlier. When Jesus declared all foods clean (Mark 7:19), his command superseded the earlier command that certain foods be regarded as unclean (Lev .11:1-8). Acts 10:15 The voice spoke to him a second time: "Do not call anything impure that God has made clean." The command against drinking blood, like all of the Old Testament dietary regulations, has passed away: “Therefore let no one pass judgment on you in questions of food and drink” (Col 2:17, 16). 1 Timothy 4:3 They will prohibit marriage and require abstinence from certain foods that God has created to be received with thanksgiving by those who believe and know the truth. 1 Cor. 8:4-13 Therefore concerning the eating of the things sacrificed to idols, we know that an idol is nothing in the world and that there is no God except one…….But food does not bring us closer to God: We are no worse if we do not eat, and no better if we do. But be careful, lest somehow this right of yours becomes an occasion of stumbling to those being weak…….Therefore, if what I eat causes my brother to stumble, I will never eat meat again, so that I will not cause him to stumble.” 👆🏻This is what the Council of Jerusalem was referring to. It was a stumbling block for Jews to convert to the faith since this was preached from the time of Moses (but no longer). So the not eating of meat at the council was a temporary pastoral provision suggested by James to deal with this problem. But this was a disciplinary decision. Later Paul says eating idol meat is okay so long as it doesn’t scandalize others (Rom 14:1-14, 1 Cor. 8:1-13). Sexual immorality however, has never been a matter or discipline, ever, but one of morality. Disciplinary actions are also binding at Council once made, but they can also be unbound as well in the future. That’s the power of binding and loosing that was given to the Church. To my knowledge, no one has ever said to loose sexual immorality, ever, either at Florence or Basil. The eating of certain foods and sexual immorality are not even in the same category, Christ made this very clear, as did St. Paul. Lastly, 1 Cor. 10:20-21 is referring to literal worship at the altar. Paul contrasts the altar of demons with the altar of the Lord. He’s contrasting the sacrifice to demons on the pagan altar with the Eucharistic Sacrifice offered on the altar of the Lord.
@@tonyl3762 That’s why I said “some parallels” and not “several parallels”. But I also think the parallel role between King David and St. Peter in each case is also implicitly evident.
When Michael does a response to a video, he spends 10 minutes responding for every minute in the video. When there’s a panel, it goes up to 40 min per lol
It should be very easy to surmise: We, the Catholic Church, made the Bible, called it Word of God and every Christian said AMEN! Why is the Catholic Church the one true Church? Our Lord will explain: First, God the Father chooses and inspires Simon: Matthew 16:16-17 16. Simon Peter responded by saying, "You are the Christ, the Son of the living God." 17. And in response, Jesus said to him: "Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah. For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father, who is in heaven. THEN OUR LORD SAYS: • MATTHEW 16:18-19 18 . And I say to you, that you are Peter, and upon THIS ROCK I will😢 build MY CHURCH, and the gates of Hell SHALL not prevail against it. 19. And I will give YOU the keys of the kingdom of heaven. And whatever you shall bind on earth shall be bound, even in heaven. And whatever you shall release on earth shall be released, even in heaven." No doubt, such authority will last UNTIL THE END OF TIMES, as confirmed in: • MATTHEW 28:20 20. teaching them to observe all that I have ever commanded you. And behold, I AM WITH YOU ALWAYS, even to the CONSUMMATION OF THE AGE." God bless.
Says to be careful as a Protestant watching Gavin’s work saying yeah if he says there’s no evidence you’ll be swayed. Then proceeds to gang up 4 Catholic heavy hitters against him not being there to defend what he meant by that ( like he said gavin didn’t have time to deep dive) and thinks that’s a fair comparison? Seems like you did what Gavin did x4. Fair fights lead to a much more equal playing field a much more equal outcome
Michael is too kind, saying "Ortlunds stuff is worth interacting with" as it really is merely "stuff"! I can't come to a conclusion other than seing yet another desperate attempt of Ortland "stabbing" at "stuff", cringeworthy desperately trying to be good at something he just isn't. Ortlunds arguments are weak, boting and he strings you along endlessly in every of his productions. I simply cannot watch him any longer. The desperation airing from him superceed his knowledge and subject by far and the fact he on occasion likes to point at his "Dr." title (guarantee for boredom) underlines his desperation. His topics have all been refuted time and time again by top line catholic apologists.
Having said that he certainly uses rhetorical flourishes as mentioned in the video; but that's not necessarily a bad thing. Being a good orator goes a long way and rhetoric is an integral part of that; and enjoy it from a viewer standpoint when good Catholic apologists are irenic but still adopt similar rhetorical flourishes.
There was a rewrite of church history, in an attempt to centralize power around Rome. This was done by Eusebius, the earlier writings before his time. He used the apostles Peter and John to do this. Peter never stepped foot in Rome. John was not around after AD73, since he was a part of the house of Israel and their last day was September 22, AD73 and Tishri 5 in the Hebraic calendar. Many of the earlier writings had been modified, such as Irenaeus, Clement of “Rome”, and others.
I think I may have just been convinced of the papacy...
God bless
Come home...you are always welcome and we look forward to seeing you at Mass
Can we get an update?
This is so awesome! Catholics are so blessed to have so many excellent and accessible apologists!
We need to have next-generation apologists to perpetually safeguard the faith against “the clever workings of the devil.”
@@clarekuehn4372, I don't understand what you're really trying to say...
Papacy is rooted in Solomon’s temple. I wish more of us Catholics would grab a hold of this, to show how biblical it is. It’s not just a mere development of pragmatism and convenience. It’s truly part and parcel of the fabric of the temple worldview.
You guys did a fantastic, thorough job!
@@DixonCameronS amen brother. My channel is heavily built upon how the church fulfills the temple. You might like the Content! I just interviewed Michael yesterday too!
How does solomon's temple point to the papacy? Please tell us
I would also be happy to learn more about it. Maybe you'll make a video about it or do you already have one? God bless you
@@mylovejesus4708 if you go to my channel and go to episode, I think it’s 32, with Suan sonna, we do an episode on it!
Thank you! I will have a look at it. 😇
It is important to bear in mind that the convictions of the Church Fathers in the first centuries of the Church were held in a time in which truth was being tested by persecution and martyrdom. They were not theological dilettantes..
Two saints that are venerated in both the West and *the East.*
1. *St. Maximus the Confessor*
"How much more in the case of the clergy and Church of the Romans, which from old until now, as the elder of all the Churches which are under the sun, *presides over all?* Having *surely received this canonically, as well from councils and apostles, as from the princes of the latter [Peter & Paul],* and being numbered in their company, *she is subject to no writings or issues of synodical documents, on account of the eminence of her pontificate, even as in all these things all are equally subject to her according to sacerdotal law"* [PL 129.585-6].
"[For] he is only wasting words who thinks he must convince or lure such people as myself, instead of satisfying or entreating *the blessed Pope of the most holy Catholic Church of Rome, that is, the Apostolic throne, which is from the incarnate Son Himself and which, in accordance with the holy canons and the definitions of faith, received from all the holy councils universal and supreme dominion, authority, and power of binding and loosing over all the holy churches of God which are in the whole world.* For with it the Word who is above the celestial powers binds and looses in heaven also. For if he thinks he must satisfy others, and fails to implore the most blessed Roman Pope, he is acting like a man who, when accused of murder or some other crime, does not hasten to prove his innocence to the judge appointed by law, but only uselessly and without profit does his best to demonstrate his innocence to private individuals, who have no power to acquit him from the accusation" [PG 91.141-146].
2. *St.Theodore the Studite*
"[To the Pope Leo III] ... I borrow now the cry of the coryphaeus of the apostles, calling Christ to his assistance when the waves of the sea had surged upwards, and I say to your Christ-imitating Beatitude: O arch-shepherd of the church which is under heaven, save us now; we perish. Imitate Christ your Master; stretch out your hand to the Church which is among us as he stretched out his hand to Peter ... Emulate, we beg you, the great pope whose name you bear, and just as he, when the heresy of Eutyches appeared, stood erect spiritually as a lion with his dogmatic letters, so in your turn (I dare to say it because of your name) roar divinely, or rather send forth your thunder against the present heresy. For if they, usurping an authority which does not belong to them, have dared to convene a heretical council, whereas those who follow ancient custom do not even have the right of convening an orthodox one without your knowledge, it seems absolutely necessary, we dare to say to you, that your *divine primacy* should call together a lawful council, so that the Catholic dogma may drive out heresy and that your primacy may neither be anathematized by these new voices lacking authority, nor may wills disposed to evil find in this adulterous council an excuse for being involved in sin.
It is in order *to obey your divine authority as chief pastor* that we have set forth these things as it befitted our nothingness, we the least members of the church. For the rest, we beg Your Holiness to count us among your sheep and to enlighten and strengthen us by your holy prayers ... my father and companion the monk, as well as my brother the archbishop of Thessalonica, are imprisoned on other islands. *But they say the same things that I do, and with me they prostrate themselves at the sacred feet of Your Beatitude"* [PG 99.1017-21].
*"To the most holy father, leading luminary of the universe, our lord and master, the apostolic pope* ... From the height of heaven the glittering sun of the morning has sent us its rays; Christ our God has established Your Beatitude in the west on the first apostolic throne as a divine torch for the illumination of the church which is under heaven ... we learned from our brethren, who had been sent to you, all the great things said and done by your holy headship. You did not admit the heretical deputies into your presence, but sent them away when they were still far away ... you sympathized with our misfortunes as with the misfortunes of your own sheep, as our letters were read and our messengers heard without delay. And we lowly monks indeed recognize as a manifest successor of the coryphaeus of the apostles the [bishop] who presides over the Church of Rome, and we are certain that God has not abandoned the church of our country, because divine providence has reserved His assistance for it since the beginning ... which He gives by you and by you alone. For from the beginning, you are the ever pure and ever limpid stream of orthodoxy; you are the tranquil harbor where the whole church finds sure shelter against all the tempests of heresy, you are the citadel chosen by God to be the assured refuge of salvation" [PG 99.1153-6].
"Byzantium has shaken off the yoke of the gospel as a heifer pricked by the goad; she shakes off the harness. She is furiously agitated like the Corybantes; she is intoxicated with blood as a lioness; as the serpent she stops her ears; she kicks against the censure. *A voice made itself heard to warn her, equal to a voice from heaven - the voice of the supreme throne of Rome:* ‘what have you done? You have denied Christ by forbidding his image, that of the Mother of God and all the saints ... Open your ear to obedience; listen to the words of the gospel, an apostle, a prophet, a father.’ But Byzantium did not listen, did not receive those words. She raised her head against almighty God, outraging Christ and trampling upon his chosen saints..." [PG 99.1280].
These are amazing references. Easterners will just say it’s Byzantine flattery lol
dear brother , what is the name of books if these two saints mentioned above?
As an ex-protestant I really wish other protestants would listen to these types of d discussions, because if u can see the papcy being true right away from the beginning of ur studies then its going to be alot easier to see the harder issues like the Eucharist.
because once I realize once saved always saved is false, and then I realize the Eucharist is true, and everything else is biblical, and it really was the papacy for me being the final thing that I need to see, to be a Catholic.
Listening to conversations like these really helps us Protestants to see a diff point of view.
Cuz its true the majority of Christian 2day, will say they know the Bible, but they don't know first century Jewish culture, and what they did before, they can't see what words mean in Jewish culture, but then they can understand we have ebonics today in r language, it's ridiculous to think that the Jews didn't have didnt have the same type of language.
I'm a Protestant and I found this utterly unconvincing. It seemed like college students who all agreed with each other sitting the dorm common room talking about politics. Did they really need nearly three hours to deal with Dr. Ortlund's much-shorter video?
@@toddthacker8258 everybody's entitled to their own opinion my friend.
@@toddthacker8258 but it wasn't my job to make it sound convincing. But it looks like you didn't even watch the video. They're the ones that actually give you the evidence here, so that you can study on your own. And that's what everybody needs to do, obviously including Protestants...
@@onlylove556 "You'd agree with me if only you studied" isn't a very convincing argument, but be well.
This video reeks of arrogance and condescension. Difficult to persuade from such a point, even if you are absolutely correct on the merits.
@@toddthacker8258 like i said you're entitled to your own opinion, no1 is forcing u to believe in Catholicism.
I still hold to my original statement. That I wish all protestants would actually study more on the early apostolic church fathers. To actually listen, & learn from Catholic theologians; Let me defend themselves....
Bc the evidence for Catholicism is overwhelming....
Great video!
Thank you. Part deux forthcoming.
@@ReasonandTheology please title “Catholic Avengers: Endgame” lol.
I remember listening to a podcast long ago that involved a Protestant convert to Catholicism. I have forgotten who it was, but his comments have stuck with me. On papal infallibility, he said, and I'm paraphrasing, "To many Protestants, papal infallibility is seen as a super power that the Pope possesses. So, Catholics spreading the faith should keep this in their thoughts. Instead, papal infallibility should be seen as safeguard, a protection on the chair, by God. The Holy Spirit is constantly at work."
I love the team, God bless everyone on this Holy week. God bless love everyone at R&T 🙏🛐🗝️🗝️💯 Catholic 🛐
Fantastic job by everyone. The recent show on PWA with Scott Hahn and Cameron was excellent too. I feel like with the surge in RUclips Catholic apologetics we may see a wave of protestants converting in the next several years.
Honestly, I feel like the case for the papacy is airtight, but on a human level it can be difficult for people for a variety of reasons (submitting to authority, friends/family, etc.).
Resistance to submission to authority is central IMHO. I see this in my own family. Pride is the #1 pitfall for all of us IMHO.
@@yajunyuan7665 By what authority do *you* determine who does or doesn't have the gifts of the apostles and prophets? With all due respect, brother, who died and made *you* the Magisterium?
@@yajunyuan7665 LOL, OK, so what? I'm thinking you may not understand what the papacy and Magisterium even *are.* Michael has some good videos explaining all that stuff, if you're interested. ;)
And BTW....your "observations" are entirely subjective, fallible, and open to debate. They are far from authoritative, and that's an understatement.
I asked you "by what authority." you were making your sweeping claims. You answered, "observation," but that's not an answer. Not even close. Other people's observations differ from yours. Dramatically in many cases. So, who decides who's right? Who's the arbiter? Not you, my brother. You're not above it all. Again, nobody died and made you the Magisterium.
Obviously, your observations have no binding authority behind them. That's the whole issue. Authority. There *is* a divinely instituted Teaching Authority. You aren't it.
And yeah, neither am I. That's why I defer to the Authority Jesus Himself established: "the Church, the pillar and ground of the Truth."
Bottom line: What makes *your* observations correct versus anyone else's? Again, "by what authority" do you make your claims?
This is so excellent. As someone who lives near a Word-of-Faith / NAR / Catch-the-Fire adherent, I have certainly seen the pitfalls of Sola Scriptura up-close and personal!
More of this please! 🙌
I disagree that the keys were given to all of the apostles. The power of the keys, yes, but not the keys themselves. The Catechism (CCC 553) confirms this: "553 Jesus entrusted a specific authority to Peter: "I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven." The "power of the keys" designates authority to govern the house of God, which is the Church. Jesus, the Good Shepherd, confirmed this mandate after his Resurrection: "Feed my sheep." The power to "bind and loose" connotes the authority to absolve sins, to pronounce doctrinal judgments, and to make disciplinary decisions in the Church. Jesus entrusted this authority to the Church through the ministry of the apostles and in particular through the ministry of Peter, the only one to whom he specifically entrusted the keys of the kingdom."
The last sentence says the keys were only given to Peter.
You are definitely not alone.
St. Eulogius of Alexandria
"Neither to John, nor to any other of the disciples, did our Savior say, 'I will give to thee the keys of the Kingdom of Heaven,' but only to Peter" [Eulogius, Lib. ii. Cont. Novatian. ap. Photium, Biblioth, cod. 280].
John the Apostle acknowledge Peters primacy:
John recount the events of that Easter morning when he and Peter were allerted that the tomb in which Christ was burried, was found to be empty. John the younger apostle despite him outrunning Peter merely peered into the tomb then stepped back, to allow Peter his leader to step in and carry out a systematic formal enquiry; examine the facts before drawing any conclusions. Both John and Peter implicitly conclude that the body of Christ was stolen, wherefore they ended their investigation and went home!
The Church and her doctrines naturally developed over time. If it were to have all the answers in its infancy, there may be no need for the guidance of the Holy Spirit.
Why even believe in Ortlund, can his opinions over come the 2000 year old history of the church...with it's church fathers, doctors of the church, learned men throughout history, a church that has preserved and protected the words of the scripture for centuries.
Still a Baptist as far as I know, so how serious can he be about church history?
@@jasonkirklin2263 True....
The church and the church fathers has warned and battled against heresies even in the earliest of times....and 2000 years later the church still stands as it had from the beginning. ".....gates of hell will not prevail"
Through out Christian history, thousands of learned and holy men has gone though every millimeter of the bible, all questions have been asked and answered and the Magisterium of the Catholic Church is church's authority to give authentic interpretation of the Word of God, "whether in its written form or in the form of Tradition." - No one man's opinion can change these facts.
The church is whole, the Pope, the bishops, the priest, the sacraments, 73 books of the bible, it's catechism, it's saints, it's traditions, it's holidays, etc...
The largest Christian church 1.3 B Catholics, - it prays and speak in all languages, it's 200,000+ parishes, 400,000 priest, 5,000 bishops - It is a force of good to the world.
The Church operates more than 140,000 schools, 10,000 orphanages, 5,000 hospitals and some 16,000 health clinics.
Caritas, the umbrella organization for Catholic aid agencies, estimates that spending by its affiliates totals between £2 billion and £4 billion a year, making it one of the biggest aid agencies in the world. - Every day the church feeds, cloths, shelters and educates more people than any other organization in the world -
“I have been to some truly dark places where the suffering would be hard for most Americans to imagine,” said Nikki Haley, former U.S. Ambassador to the United Nation. And who did she find there? The Catholic Church, doing “everyday miracles,” and “helping millions of desperate people.”
Some very edifying material.
By the way, Mr. Lofton...the background lighting is really coming together and looking good 👍!
Scripture alone did nothing to prevent Harvard University from going from trinitarianism to unitarianism
« to be deep in history is to CEASE to be Protestant. »
Looks like Dr. Ortlund needs to dive deeper.
@@swoosh1mil yes he does but there is a danger that he will become Catholic if he does. this has happened to so many protestants.
@@yajunyuan7665 and you know this...how?
@@yajunyuan7665 That sounds very reasonable.
As my Byzantinist husband would say, there's scant (extant) evidence for *anything* from antiquity! All historians of antiquity recognize this -- it's a real challenge. Historians of World War II do not face this challenge, LOL. But historians dealing with the ancient / early patristic world do.
There are reams of evidence and an unbroken line of living memory by early Christian’s concerning authority. Dr Ortlund thinks he has wriggle room because the word “papacy” was not used to describe the office and even if it was, he would find some way to deny the office. I feel safe saying that because St Peter says in scripture Noah and those with him were saved through water and baptism, being like this, now saves you also. Baptists do not believe this and do all sorts of contortions to negate the teaching, seemingly to separate themselves from the ancient faith.
Dr Ortlund can be quite gracious and I admire his bravery swimming with these intellectual sharks. He thinks he has a can of shark repellent, but it’s actually filled with blood.
I'm in RCIA, about to enter the Church. I first started giving Catholicism serious consideration when I understood the failure of Sola Scriptura.
🎉
Really think the issue with st Cyprian is a good example of a young church growing.
You’re only missing to the dream team Steven Ray
Gavin is Pope of Ortlundism - and he’s infallible!
Fantastic
I just listened to his response. I think he said essentially there is zero early evidence for the papacy.
Hey Michael! I'm actually pretty new to the channel (been following mostly videos regarding protestants), I have a question for you, perhaps you could explain this to me. Why does an "act" of contrition require contrition but the sacrament of confession only attrition?
Also is an "act" of contrition merely being contrite or does it require an action or prayer.
In John 21:7 we see John allert Peter that Christ was on the beach, implying that because Peter is the leader of the twelve, he needed to be the first to reconcile with Jesus. Note Peter changed his clothing and rushed to meet Christ on the beach.Christ wasted no time to question Peters motives of credibility, upon which his shepherdship is affirmed.
Suan, look at the comments on Gavin's videos. He definitely is on a crusade against Catholicism. Don't let his nice-guy shtick fool you.
Introduction track is dope. As holy as funky... Who's that? 🙂
There also seems to be some parallels between the Council of Jerusalem in (Acts 15) with the Council of Jerusalem in (1 Chronicles 28) - in terms of its hierarchical structure.
@@yajunyuan7665 First, any divine command that comes later modifies divine commands that came earlier. When Jesus declared all foods clean (Mark 7:19), his command superseded the earlier command that certain foods be regarded as unclean (Lev .11:1-8).
Acts 10:15
The voice spoke to him a second time: "Do not call anything impure that God has made clean."
The command against drinking blood, like all of the Old Testament dietary regulations, has passed away: “Therefore let no one pass judgment on you in questions of food and drink” (Col 2:17, 16).
1 Timothy 4:3
They will prohibit marriage and require abstinence from certain foods that God has created to be received with thanksgiving by those who believe and know the truth.
1 Cor. 8:4-13
Therefore concerning the eating of the things sacrificed to idols, we know that an idol is nothing in the world and that there is no God except one…….But food does not bring us closer to God: We are no worse if we do not eat, and no better if we do. But be careful, lest somehow this right of yours becomes an occasion of stumbling to those being weak…….Therefore, if what I eat causes my brother to stumble, I will never eat meat again, so that I will not cause him to stumble.”
👆🏻This is what the Council of Jerusalem was referring to. It was a stumbling block for Jews to convert to the faith since this was preached from the time of Moses (but no longer). So the not eating of meat at the council was a temporary pastoral provision suggested by James to deal with this problem.
But this was a disciplinary decision. Later Paul says eating idol meat is okay so long as it doesn’t scandalize others (Rom 14:1-14, 1 Cor. 8:1-13).
Sexual immorality however, has never been a matter or discipline, ever, but one of morality.
Disciplinary actions are also binding at Council once made, but they can also be unbound as well in the future. That’s the power of binding and loosing that was given to the Church.
To my knowledge, no one has ever said to loose sexual immorality, ever, either at Florence or Basil.
The eating of certain foods and sexual immorality are not even in the same category, Christ made this very clear, as did St. Paul.
Lastly, 1 Cor. 10:20-21 is referring to literal worship at the altar. Paul contrasts the altar of demons with the altar of the Lord. He’s contrasting the sacrifice to demons on the pagan altar with the Eucharistic Sacrifice offered on the altar of the Lord.
@@tonyl3762 That’s why I said “some parallels” and not “several parallels”. But I also think the parallel role between King David and St. Peter in each case is also implicitly evident.
1:00:48 is a really good point by Joe
Jesus is the only way. Jesus said " I am the way, the truth and the live. No one comes to the Father, but through the pope."
Boss video!
Did he say Wayne Grudem is a heretic? The name was muffled. I come from a reformed tradition, Wayne Grudem was a rock star in my baptist church.
When Michael does a response to a video, he spends 10 minutes responding for every minute in the video. When there’s a panel, it goes up to 40 min per
lol
His videos would be better if shorter.
It should be very easy to surmise: We, the Catholic Church, made the Bible, called it Word of God and every Christian said AMEN!
Why is the Catholic Church the one true Church?
Our Lord will explain:
First, God the Father chooses and inspires Simon:
Matthew 16:16-17
16. Simon Peter responded by saying, "You are the Christ, the Son of the living God."
17. And in response, Jesus said to him: "Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah. For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father, who is in heaven.
THEN OUR LORD SAYS:
• MATTHEW 16:18-19
18 . And I say to you, that you are Peter, and upon THIS ROCK I will😢 build MY CHURCH, and the gates of Hell SHALL not prevail against it.
19. And I will give YOU the keys of the kingdom of heaven. And whatever you shall bind on earth shall be bound, even in heaven. And whatever you shall release on earth shall be released, even in heaven."
No doubt, such authority will last UNTIL THE END OF TIMES, as confirmed in:
• MATTHEW 28:20
20. teaching them to observe all that I have ever commanded you. And behold, I AM WITH YOU ALWAYS, even to the CONSUMMATION OF THE AGE."
God bless.
Woah! 👀
Joe coming with the slam dunk at the the 2:30:00
You are missing one panelist, Dr. Ortlund. It’s a shame he wasn’t part of this discussion as it would have been more conclusive.
Says to be careful as a Protestant watching Gavin’s work saying yeah if he says there’s no evidence you’ll be swayed. Then proceeds to gang up 4 Catholic heavy hitters against him not being there to defend what he meant by that ( like he said gavin didn’t have time to deep dive) and thinks that’s a fair comparison? Seems like you did what Gavin did x4. Fair fights lead to a much more equal playing field a much more equal outcome
Michael is too kind, saying "Ortlunds stuff is worth interacting with" as it really is merely "stuff"! I can't come to a conclusion other than seing yet another desperate attempt of Ortland "stabbing" at "stuff", cringeworthy desperately trying to be good at something he just isn't. Ortlunds arguments are weak, boting and he strings you along endlessly in every of his productions. I simply cannot watch him any longer. The desperation airing from him superceed his knowledge and subject by far and the fact he on occasion likes to point at his "Dr." title (guarantee for boredom) underlines his desperation. His topics have all been refuted time and time again by top line catholic apologists.
Having said that he certainly uses rhetorical flourishes as mentioned in the video; but that's not necessarily a bad thing. Being a good orator goes a long way and rhetoric is an integral part of that; and enjoy it from a viewer standpoint when good Catholic apologists are irenic but still adopt similar rhetorical flourishes.
True, but he can still mislead people with all his ramblings and for some people, that can be a danger to their soul.
Great conversation and exploration of the facts.
At points, the ums and stuttering make listening extremely difficult.
😅if Catholicism is the one true church then why can some Protestant ministers do exorcisms?
There was a rewrite of church history, in an attempt to centralize power around Rome. This was done by Eusebius, the earlier writings before his time. He used the apostles Peter and John to do this. Peter never stepped foot in Rome. John was not around after AD73, since he was a part of the house of Israel and their last day was September 22, AD73 and Tishri 5 in the Hebraic calendar. Many of the earlier writings had been modified, such as Irenaeus, Clement of “Rome”, and others.