My website: www.JordanBCooper.com Patreon: / justandsinner In this video I give five reasons why I am not Roman Catholic, and instead remain in the Lutheran church.
Well, Lance, now what are you gonna do ? Do you find his points convincing, or only clear and said with conviction ? I"m an ex-Catholic, and agree with Jordan on most points. But I have an advanced degree in Religion from a Baptist univ.
Don't forget they murdered Martin Luther and Christians during the Dark Ages if they didn't go along with their doctrine... Protestant churches have forgotten why they fled to the wilderness.
@@jennifertinker985 well ...Martin Luther was a dangerous heretic ...🤣🤣 He did tremendous harm to the church , even today countless souls are in danger because of his beliefs . In America , you get the death penalty for one murder or more so I can have sympothy for a man and his followers condemned who can cause the loss of millions and future billions if souls .
I appreciate this video. You understand Catholic theology well and rationalize your point of view without trash talking Catholics at all. Many Protestant UA-camrs I view fall into the stereotypes on how they see Catholics, so it’s hard for me, as a Catholic to ever see Protestants present their views vs Catholic views because they don’t even understand the other side. This video was interesting and caught my attention the whole time.
It’s indeed refreshing to hear a sophisticated critique on Catholicism instead of senseless bible bashing even though I don’t agree with his views i appreciate his use of “I think” before his sentences as it implies his ideas come from a more personal view point. The traditional Latin Catholic liturgy is still the most powerful form of worship in my experience having attended multiple Protestant and modern Catholic masses. I find the Protestant critique is strictly biblical which I struggle with as my view on the bible is it’s undeniably the will/word of God but it’s spoken though man which leaves it wide open to interpretation and interpretations can get really messy. I feel most judgements made on Catholic rites and rituals are rather shallow interpretations of “the right way to pray” which is ironic coming from Lutherans as my understanding Luther claimed that one must have Faith in God above all doctrines. So if one has faith in god then rites and rituals are rather trivial. Deo Gràtias 🙏
Benjamin Flynn You are entitled to your opinion, but the criticism can be sort of “debunked.” The audience is a more casual audience is mainly Christian, you shouldn’t expect for him to go overly in depth in Catholic theology. What he did mention as far as Catholic Theology is true, he didn’t use his Lutheran bias to take away the facts, which is something many people do when they speak of the other viewpoint. The video was already long, if he went in depth on Catholic theology he’d get off topic and be missing the point of the video, making it excessively long with unnecessary facts that are unrelated to the topic.
I was an atheist for my entire life. Started studying the Bible and watching videos and praying and it brought me to Jesus. I searched the denominations and I found the Lutheran Missouri synod to fit the best. They kept the good things about the Catholic Church but cleansed the nonsense. I studied Roman Catholic a ton because my wife was a Roman Catholic. Found a lot of inconsistency and contradictory between catholic teachings and their extra books. I could go on and on. But a lot of what he’s saying plus what others have said is simply why.
I am an orthodox but Wdym by extra books. Are u referring to the catholic deutrocanon??? If it is, the deutrocanon was part of scripture even during the reformation movement. Martin Luther didnt remove the deutrocanonical books but the later protestants are actually the ones that removed the books from the canon. And they also were quoted in the NT.
Extra books? You mean the books in the Septuagint which Christ and the Apostles used, which were considered inspired for the first 1500 years of Christianity by both Catholics and most Orthodox? Did you know Luther contemplated removing James, Revelations and possibly even Hebrews from the New Testament canon?
Recently I went to a Lutheran Church for the first time. BEST Church i have ever been to. Like you said, it had everything I love and admire about Catholics (tradition, liturgy/worship) while keeping out the Catholic practices and theology that isn't Biblically supported. I think I have moved on from the Baptist denomination and will be transitioning to Lutheran :) It is a lovely Church
@@KoiDotJpegI'm also considering Lutheran. On 11/25/23 Jesus Christ spoke to me and my life changed in that moment of time. I was raised Christian but for a number of reasons, turned away from God. When he spoke to me, I completely understand so much, I received a "knowing". I've been looking for a church to join and Lutheran seems very good. Wish me luck and good luck to you in finding your home.
I was raised in a a Lutheran church (was baptized Catholic because my grandfather wanted my parents to do that) I’ve considered joining Catholicism before before watching you my theological understanding of Lutheranism was mediocre at best. The only thing that stopped me from switching is how bitter and angry Catholics are when you talk about theological differences between Protestants and Catholics
As a Protestant you may also want to look at the other side of angry baptists and evangelicals who are very anti catholic… I don’t think one’s views of another denomination should determine whether or not you agree or disagree theologically. This is coming from a Protestant.
You may want to research Martin Luther more. I am an ex-Lutheran. He was a wicked and blasphemous man who blasphemed Our Lord Jesus Christ and claimed unspeakably wicked things about Him that I cannot even type because they are so horrific. He also spoke often to the devil and records his (very disturbing, graphic, and vulgar) interactions with the devil in his writings. Short video on who he really was: ua-cam.com/video/xL2Hyve-kwg/v-deo.html Long video on who he really was: ua-cam.com/video/KQU8zPDdk8E/v-deo.html The true Faith is the unchanged Catholic Faith, not the "Catholic Church" down the street with the liberal novus ordo priests dancing around (depending on where you live, some are more conservative than others) but the true unchanged Catholic Church. The current state of the true Church is a state of sede-vacante, meaning the chair of St. Peter is currently vacant as there is no valid Pope. Francis is a false pope. This website explains it: novusordowatch.org/
As a Lutheran convert to Catholicism, I appreciate your firm, yet respectful videos. It's quite ironic that the Lutheranism I departed (female priests, homosexual clergy, etc..) is becoming fashionable among the prelates in Rome. Seemingly, a chasm exists between the pre and post Vatican II Church. Separately, I would love to see a respectful debate and discussion with you, Dr. Taylor Marshall (Catholic), and Fr. Josiah Trenham (Orthodox.) Cheers, Erik
... Erik... Did Luther, Huss, Zwingli, Wycliffe.. risk their lives.. for you to betray them by becoming part of Rome?? I say that you should swim AWAY in the Tiber.. and return to the Biblical TRUTH... for the sake of your soul.
Is there any particular reason that you did no join the LCMS rather than the Catholic Church,as the LCMS dont have female priests, homosexual clergy, etc..?
I’m non-denominational and considering Lutheranism. These videos have been very informational and straightforward. I like the unedited format. Just turn on the camera, and talk about your perspective. It’s refreshing. I also think you did a good job clearly presenting your points without being needlessly hurtful to Catholics. Great video.
I was 4 square which runs many of the nondenominational churches. I am now LCMS, be careful the ELCA is about as Lutheran as FedEx is federal (not at all). What drew me to LCMS was that the nondenominational churches have no real roots to keep them consistent, or in some cases biblical, and they always felt like churches where you never really got out of Sunday school. You can color only so many pictures of Noah’s arc before you start asking more questions. Lutheranism is based on studies of the church’s that the original apostles set up and is very heavy on studying the Bible as a whole instead of memorizing a few out of context scriptures or often mistakenly using little Christian idioms that are not even in the Bible. What is funny is that you can go back to some of the earliest CATHOLIC Churches and study them and that is essentially what you see in a Lutheran service (note all caps CATHOLIC refers to the early Christian church as opposed to Catholic which is a specific church). In fact Martin Luther didn’t call himself a Lutheran but rather a reformed Catholic. We were the original “reject modernity” movement as we broke away from Catholicism to return to the old ways and scripture.
if you haven’t decided yet, RUN to Lutheranism. My bf and i were non denominational until about 2 months ago and then started attending a Lutheran church after months of looking into different denominations because of the surface level watered down theology at our ND church. changed our lives forever. we’re in the process of becoming members in the church and the stuff we’re learning about the denomination is so refreshing. we go to a WELS church because it’s what was around us and we appreciate the more conservative traditions and values they hold. it’s what Christianity was and should be. 10/10 would recommend Lutheranism. an amazing change from the powerpoints and watered down gospels we used to get 🙌🏻
@@albusai Col 2:11-12 If baptism is the new circumcision and circumcision was to be done 8 days after birth then it follows that baptism is as well. Also early churches, like the original 12 apostles churches if baptizing a pregnant woman had her return and baptize the baby. So no it doesn’t directly say it but it was a procedure in the first Christian churches
@@albusai It may be more biblical than we know. The bible talks of adult converts that were called to be baptized. I don't see anything wrong w/ infant baptism now though.
I don't think you can talk about the power of the Papacy without referring to the historical circumstances. The entire west was under Rome's jurisdiction while the east was split between 4 other Patriarchs. Later on 3 of them fell to Islam while the 4th was under the Emperors of Constantinople. It's not hard to see how that left the Papacy out on its own, so to speak. No wonder that Popes were able to secure so much power over the Church as it existed in Latin-speaking Europe.
Yes, and then when Rome fell and in the absence of the secular government the Church found itself the only organization that had educated leaders that the people looked to for guidance -- it resulted in the church having to assume roles it was never meant to have to take on. I do believe that was the start of many of the problems that lead to the reformation. 🙏✝️🙏
which way do you lean on that? I am also former Roman, but then leaned more reformed , then found the Lutheran view of election faithful to scriptural ideas since it was willing to follow the twists and turns of scripture on the matter.
Oh yeah, both the "Papal infallibility" and "Intercession of the Saints" are two of the most difficult dogma/doctrine and/or doctrine/dogma to wrap my head around.
Because they are baseless and made up to set a structure of power and control. The Catholic Church is infamous for exploiting ambiguity in scripture and tradition to deviate from sound doctrine. Do your research on "Intercession of the saints" and you will see how the church stretched tradition very thin to reach that conclusion, and how there were no such practices in early Christianity, before church became the state. There is a stark contrast between the primitive church and the imperial one.
both of them are unbiblical and sinful no human is infallible, only God and "intercession of the saints" is completely made up the bible says their is ONE mediator: Jesus Christ praying to dead people is necromancy
I’ve watched several of your videos and enjoy them. Will you make (or have you already made) one explaining the differences between the various Lutheran groups?
@@johnmarquardt1991 i can introduce you to dozen in my local area if you like. Nearly half of lcms churchs in the western district have deacons not pastors. Not enough pastors to go around
@@colnagocowboy Our district did away with what you call deacons. The problem in your area is that you will not pay pastors enough money -- you're cheap. Kansas had the same problem.
Petros v petra debate is absolutely lacking legs omitting the fact this entire original conversation was in Aramaic. Moreover Jesus uses the singular “you” when saying "I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; and whatever you bind on earth shall have been bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall have been loosed in heaven." Also why, if this conversation is insignificant and “misinterpreted” by Catholics, is there so many Early Church Fathers that indicate a special primacy to the Church in Rome? Clement of Rome Accept our counsel and you will have nothing to regret. . . . If anyone disobeys the things which have been said by him [Jesus] through us, let them know that they will involve themselves in no small danger. We, however, shall be innocent of this sin and will pray with entreaty and supplication that the Creator of all may keep unharmed the number of his elect (Letter to the Corinthians 58:2, 59:1[A.D. 95]). Ignatius of Antioch You [the See of Rome] have envied no one, but others have you taught. I desire only that what you have enjoined in your instructions may remain in force (Epistle to the Romans 3:1 [A.D. 110]). Irenaeus 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 [inter A.D. 189]). Clement of Alexandria [T]he blessed Peter, the chosen, the preeminent, the first among the disciples, for whom alone with himself the Savior paid the tribute [Matt. 17:27], quickly grasped and understood their meaning. And what does he say? “Behold, we have left all and have followed you” [Matt. 19:2 7, Mark 10:28] (Who is the Rich Man that is Saved? 21:3-5 [A.D. 200]). Tertullian [T]he Lord said to Peter, “On this rock I will build my Church, I have given you the keys of the kingdom of heaven [and] whatever you shall have bound or loosed on earth will be bound or loosed in heaven” [Matt. 16:18-19]. ... Upon you, he says, I will build my Church; and I will give to you the keys, not to the Church; and whatever you shall have bound or you shall have loosed, not what they shall have bound or they shall have loosed (Modesty 21:9-10 [A.D. 220]). Letter of Clement to James Be it known to you, my lord, that Simon [Peter], who, for the sake of the true faith, and the most sure foundation of his doctrine, was set apart to be the foundation of the Church, and for this end was by Jesus himself, with his truthful mouth, named Peter, the first-fruits of our Lord, the first of the apostles; to whom first the Father revealed the Son; whom the Christ, with good reason, blessed; the called, and elect (Letter of Clement to James 2 [A.D, 221]). Origen And Peter, on whom the Church of Christ is built, against which the gates of hell shall not prevail left only one epistle of acknowledged genuineness (Commentaries on John 5:3 [A.D. 226-232]). Cyprian With a false bishop appointed for themselves by heretics, they dare even to set sail and carry letters from schismatics and blasphemers to the Chair of Peter and to the principal church [at Rome], in which sacerdotal unity has its source" (Epistle to Cornelius [Bishop of Rome] 59:14 [A.D. 252]). Constantine Augustus and that the opposing parties who were contending persistently and incessantly with each other, should be summoned from Africa; that in their presence, and in the presence of the bishop of Rome, the matter which appeared to be causing the disturbance might be examined and decided with all care (To Chrestus [A.D. 314] as recorded by Eusebius). Cyril of Jerusalem In the power of the same Holy Spirit, Peter, both the chief of the apostles and the keeper of the keys of the kingdom of heaven, in the name of Christ healed Aeneas the paralytic at Lydda, which is now called Diospolis [Acts 9 ;3 2-3 4] (Catechetical Lectures 17;27 [A.D. 350]). Optatus In the city of Rome the Episcopal chair was given first to Peter, the chair in which Peter sat, the same who was head - that is why he is also called Cephas - of all the apostles, the one chair in which unity is maintained by all. Neither do the apostles proceed individually on their own, and anyone who would [presume to] set up another chair in opposition to that single chair would, by that very fact, be a schismatic and a sinner. . . . Recall, then, the origins of your chair, those of you who wish to claim for yourselves the title of holy Church" (The Schism of the Donatists 2:2 [circa A.D. 367]). Ephraim Simon, my follower, I have made you the foundation of the holy Church. I betimes called you Peter, because you will support all its tall buildings. You are the inspector of those who will build on earth a Church for Me. If they should wish to build what is false, you, the foundation, will condemn them. You are the head of the fountain from which my teaching flows, you are the chief of my disciples. Through you I will give drink to all peoples (Homilies 4:1 [inter A.D. 338-373]). Ambrose of Milan [Christ] made answer: “You are Peter, and upon this rock will I build my Church . . .” Could he not, then, strengthen the faith of the man to whom, acting on his own authority, he gave the kingdom, whom he called the rock, thereby declaring him to be the foundation of the Church [Matt. 16:18]? (The Faith 4:5 [A.D. 379]). Tyrannius Rufinus and further how he speaks of the city of Rome, which now through the grace of God is reckoned by Christians as their capital (Apology 2:23 [A.D. 400]) Augustine Among these [apostles] Peter alone almost everywhere deserved to represent the whole Church. Because of that representation of the Church, which only he bore, he deserved to hear “I will give to you the keys of the kingdom of heaven" (Sermons 295:2 [A.D. 411]).
Well put brother! What the early Church father wrote is crystal clear... A Protestants job is to protest (it's in there title) and also to muddy up the waters but if you truly know and understand the history of Christianity, there's absolutely no doubt that you'll be a Catholic.
@@DrJordanBCooper let's forget about Matthew 16:18 for a second. How do you respond to Luke 22:32. Jesus says to Peter specifically the following even though the rest of the apostles are present... "But I have prayed for you, Simon, that your faith may not fail. And when you have turned back, strengthen your brothers."
How would you explain John 21:17.... "The third time he said to him, "Simon son of John, do you love me?" Peter was hurt because Jesus asked him the third time, "Do you love me?" He said, "Lord, you know all things; you know that I love you." Jesus said, "Feed my sheep." You see brother, it's not just about that single chapter & verse in Matthew 16:18 that Catholics see the authority of Peter. Its also all over holy scripture and all over the writings of the early Church fathers as well.
Jordan Cooper at 2:38 in the video. sorry brother but when you define or imply “rock” as having two different intended meanings in the passage its a “petros v petra” argument. Kephas is Kephas. The early Syriac version of Matthew while admittedly not Aramaic, makes no distinction. Otherwise your interpretation must in insist that Our Lord was speaking, went into a non sequitur for half a second, and then switched back to talking about Peter to Peter again. 15 He *said to them, “But who do you say that I am?” 16 Simon Peter answered, “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.” 17 And Jesus said to him, “Blessed are you, Simon Barjona, because flesh and blood did not reveal this to you, but My Father who is in heaven. 18 I also say to you that you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build My church; and the gates of Hades will not overpower it. 19 I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; and whatever you bind on earth shall have been bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall have been loosed in heaven.” That confession of faith and distinction of who Jesus truly is indeed is the theological rock and foundation of understanding the faith. But how can we reasonably ignore the implication of the entire passage when Jesus: 1. Changes the name of Simon; theologically significant feature in the. Bible (Abram, Abraham, Jacob, Israel) because its a Blessing and a covenant. 2. Declares that He’s building an eternal Church. Not a temple, not a shrine but a Church that belongs solely to the Son of God. 3. Declares that He will give Peter and only Peter in the presence of all the other Apostles, keys with power to bind and loose. So then what are those keys? What is that power to bind? And what happened to that gift once Peter died?
if peter was not foundation of the early church then i guess lutheranism shouldn't even exist, because luthernism takes the whole teaching of the RC and put it into his own context, somehwere Martin Luther is more comfortable with.
Barb Wellman yeah Calvinism 1500 years later if your claiming that is truth then your claiming Jesus was a terrible teacher left everyone in Limbo until they reformation and later John Calvin such garbage it’s laughable...
.. John, Let us be more charitable here. Much of these disagreements stem from each side defining certain terms differently. Also, I think that we can agree that Jesus was NOT "a terrible teacher..", the phrase you wrote above, here. You don't believe that, either.... but it would be better not to even write such, even to try to make a point... because it's too "flippant". Agree?
34Packardphaeton no it’s truth I know Jesus is the greatest teacher ever and the quotes and writings prove that the problem is you want to come in 1500 years later and claim its truth but that is ridiculous but let’s talk about the founder of the reformation Martin Luther here is some quotes he said www.davidlgray.info/2013/09/11/500-years-of-protestantism-the-33-most-ridiculous-things-martin-luther-ever-wrote/. Is that a guy to follow I mean he inspired Hitler hey but then again that goes with coming in 1500 years later and putting aside Jesus Christ Church and his teachings and sacraments...
False, the sacrificial nature of the mass is a re sacrifice of Christ, the host. The substitutionary sacrifice of Christ is performed over and over by Catholics for grace. Calvin and Anselm both beleived in substitionary atonement.
Paul: Abraham was justified for his faith, not his circumcision. James: Because Abraham had faith, he got circumcised as the LORD commanded him. My two cents, it is Christ who justifies us before God and our charitable works that justifies us before men.
Yunus Ahmed The problem with “sola fide” is that it’s no where in the Bible and no where taught in the early church. The only place in the Bible where faith alone is it says you’re saved “not by faith alone” Faith and works is what gets you saved. St. Paul says if you do anything without love it means nothing, Jesus says to receive his body and blood or else you have no life within you. These are things we’re suppose to do with our faith.
@@nicholassellers6249 What about Romans 4 and the entire book of Galatians? And Ephesians 2:8-9? The Bible states multiple times works fo not save you and are not meritorious. That if we believe and Jesus and confess with our mouth that he is Lord then we are saved. No room for works in there. And James says faith without works is dead because faith will logically produce works. Therefore faith alone saves but faith will never be alone.
Yunus Ahmed The Bible never says “Faith Alone” it says faith will save but not faith alone. What do you think about Jesus saying we much eat of his body and drink of his blood to have life within us? Or Paul saying you must have love? Catholics believe we do not receive grace through our works but only through the grace of God. Our faith will produce good works but if we have no love our faith means nothing. Most importantly though, you must eat the flesh and drink the blood of our savior. He stresses it so deeply and it’s one of the most beautiful things about the Catholic Church. To be able to receive Jesus, life itself. He says at the last supper “do this in remembrance of me” but Protestants don’t do it nearly enough.
@FaithHopeGrace Are they dead or are they alive in Christ and in heaven? Serious question. I don't believe saints are omnipresent though, so I don't pray to them
I'm really close to leaving Geneva and traveling over to Wittenberg, dear brother. Do you have any other Lutheran channels to check out that you would endorse?
Check out Ask the Pastor with Pr Sullivan in Kerville TX. Also, Pr Wolfmueller has a lot of videos too...he's a pastor in Austin. We'd love to have you here in Wittenberg (or perhaps I should say Augsburg)! I made that same move myself.
Justification by Faith is a legitimate foundational doctrine, as long as it is not used as a cover for unrighteous practice for that would contradict Paul who firmly warned that no one who does will inherit the kingdom of God.
It is legit doctrine because that is what scripture says plainly. Hypocrisy is a common human trait. That is one of the reasons we need faith in the first place. So, even though I understand your point I think I'll stick with the Bible and just believe that the faith placed inside me by the Gospel is sufficient to justify me before God through Christ alone. It is enough and is available to save.
Luther said that we are justified by faith alone, but true faith, the faith which justifies, changes us such that we have a desire to pursue righteousness, not that anyone is ever close to achieving perfect righteousness in this life, but true faith leads to a life of repentance, true sorrow for our sins and a desire to do better, rather than an attitude of now that I have been justified by faith I am free to pursue a life of sin.
Wrong wrong and wrong...explain then James 2:24 “do you see that a men is justified by means of works AND NOT BY FAITH ALONE? read it again “not by faith alone”...... So how can justification by faith alone can be a legitimate doctrine? It is incredible how you are not being told the truth on you church........ St Peter in Galatians 2:16 refers to the works of the Jewish law.......that was the problem with Martin Luther.....he interpreted the bible on his own and his teaching are still causing “intellectuals” to called justification by faith a “legitimate doctrine”
I initially thought that when works was mentioned that it referred to feeding the poor, preach the bible and help convert people to Christianity, do good deeds to help fellow man but instead works its just traditional repetitive sayings/prays/acts. If Roman Catholics were about works, why are they one of the wealthiest organisations in the world. Shouldn't this wealth go towards helping the poor, the starving, the handicapped. They could probably end world poverty with their wealth. I think the same way about other religions that have extreme wealth. I don't get it. What's the verse about a camel passing through the eye of a needle🤔
@@dansmith9724 the poor will always be here.....it is biblical.....In Matthew 26:11 the disciples got mad becauseMary Magdalene used her expensive perfume to clean Jesus’s foot and they were saying exactly the same thing you are saying (why using this expensive perfume on him, they said: they should give it to the poor) Jesus said to them “why are you bothering this woman??The poor you will always have with you” See, what you just said…. It is biblical already…. So don’t get too concern
Do you go into the Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification anywhere, by any chance? I thought it was agreed that Lutherans and Catholics agree on justification from this, but I know nothing of the details or if it holds to all Lutheran groups. Good video btw.
Dr. Cooper, I’m RC and you seem like a fair person so I have a question for you. Regarding your concern about the RC view on Justification, how do you feel about the statements by RC in the Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification? For example the JDDJ says “works follow justification and are its fruits”. It says “whatever in the justified precedes or follows the free gift of faith is neither the basis of justification nor merits it.” Regarding assurance of salvation, it says in spite of our human weaknesses, we can trust Gods promises so “the believer may yet be certain that God intends his salvation”. What are your thoughts on these statements? Thanks so much, Jim
You failed to discuss the giving of the keys and the binding and loosening to Simon specifically in Matthew 16: "17 And Jesus answered him, “Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jona! For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father who is in heaven. 18 And I tell you, you are Peter,[d] and on this rock[e] I will build my church, and the powers of death[f] shall not prevail against it.[g] 19 I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven,[h]and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.” "
Jesus was obviously appointing Peter to be the prince of the apostles, an apostle who had pre-eminent authority over the other apostles. And we see in the book of Acts that it was Peter who was in charge, making decisions, calling meetings, presiding over those meetings, etc.
I’m a Catholic searching for truth and found this very helpful. I think my beliefs are more Lutheran than Catholic. Praying I will continue grow in my faith. Thank you for these videos!
Did you start making a transition away from Catholicism, and was it for similar reasons? I find the praying to Mary and the saints some of the most problematic parts for me. That and purgatory.
Lutherans say they are the "Evangelical Catholic Church" and the reformed western Catholic Church. Basically, they keep all the R Catholic practices that don't contradict scripture, and discard those that do. I'm not Lutheran, but I'm looking into it because I'm thinking of switching. That's what they have told me.
1222 The beauty of man, created in the Living Image of God, is indescribable Wednesday, September 24th, 2014 @ 15:05 My dearly beloved daughter, just as My Beloved Mother was chosen by God to herald the Coming of the Messiah so, too, is she being called to prepare humanity for My Second Coming. She has been elevated into the highest Hierarchy in Heaven and has been accorded great powers by My Eternal Father. Nevertheless, she remains as was then, and as is now, and always will be, a devoted and humble servant of God. She serves Him in His Plan to raise man to the perfect state in which he was meant to be. The beauty of man, created in the Living Image of God, is indescribable. No man, woman or child on this earth can match that, which was created when God brought forth Adam and Eve. Sin was their downfall and Lucifer their enemy. Then, this perfect state was destroyed. Stained by sin, man will never regain this perfect state again until the serpent, and all those who worship him are banished. Until that day comes, the beauty of the human body and soul will remain tarnished. Man is God’s greatest love. The angels are His servants in that they, too, must show love for God’s Creatures. God’s Love for His family supersedes all that He created and, until He regains the souls of His children, He will never rest. God permits many sufferings, humiliations and tragedies, all of which are caused by the hatred of the one whom He held in the highest regard - the former Archangel Lucifier, who became Satan. Fallen because of his jealousy, pride and self-love, he caused My Father the greatest pain imaginable. And today, just as it was then, he still does the same. My Father’s loyal angels, all the saints and My beloved Mother, have formed a bond, which can never be broken. Whatever My Father dictates is carried out by His Elite Hierarchy. He is never questioned. Whatever My Father desires, is the correct way and the most powerful way. It is the way in which the human race can be saved from the curse of the evil one. That is His prerogative. No one would ever dare to question Him. In His Final Plan, the final stage in which He will bring His Plan of Salvation to an end, He will intervene in many ways. My Mother’s title, ‘The Mother of Salvation’, the final one given to her by the Eternal Father, God the Most High, is no accident. She was sent to warn the world and prepare it for the final onslaught against the human race by the evil one. She has been accorded this task and I ask that you accept this, and respond to her call for prayer at all times. The Holy Trinity will bring about many Blessings to those who respond to this, the final mission, from Heaven - the Mission of Salvation. Accept, with thanks that such favour has been shown to humanity with love and graciousness of heart. Your Beloved Jesus
@Asaph Vapor No, Catholics don't believe in a works based salvation. Common error amongst you Protestants though. Catholics believe in Ephesians 2:8-10.
@@thenopasslook Yes! I'm attending a Lutheran church. It's been great, but my Eastern Orthodox friends have not made things easier for me ... I had to stop talking to them, at least temporarily, to devote myself to trying to understand what's happening to me.
OK for your own sakes, I'm growing weary of hearing criticisms of Catholic orthodoxy as not reflective of the Early Church practices, when Eastern and Oriental Orthodox perspectives are shared, and often identical. In the case of Oriental Orthodoxy, this reflects stongly a shared history of practice and ideology that spans the first 400 years of Christianity (pre-Chalcedon 451AD) !
The questions I've had about the Sacrifice of the Mass has to do with forgiveness of sin. Does the sacrifice have to be represented to forgive sin, and do Roman Catholics need to participate in the Mass to be forgiven (I think mainly venial sins)? I know there is auricular and personal confession, but are they complete without participating in the Mass?
@@opfipip3711Um, no. Your incorrect rewording of it is disrespectful. Sayings like"your eyes can tell you lies", or "your eyes may deceive you," or "your eyes can play tricks on you," are very old. They simply mean that a person can be deceived. In which case, the fault is mostly in the one who deceives, and to a lesser extent in the one deceived (especially if the latter lacks the information or wisdom not to see the problems / faults in what is being told or shown them.
I respect the way you're handling these topics. There's a journey before me that has left me without any denomination or labels, so it's been difficult to explain my faith to people. I'm thinking of saying that I'm Catholic, but not Roman Catholic. What are your thoughts?
Orthodox are also Catholics. The Eastern Orthodox Catholic Church is the official name. All the churches got together in the 381 Council of Constantinople and added to the Nicene Creed the 4 Marks of the Church. "One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic" Church. Lutheran's also recite this. "Roman" in the Roman Catholics is simply because Peter, traveled there, and stayed for a good period of time, along with Paul and spent their final days before being martyred. Rome has stood the test of time, unlike the older ancient Eastern Catholic cities that fell to Islam.
That is a misunderstanding. There only one type of catholic. Roman catholic and catholic are the same...but now a days there are many individuals that are trying to call the “Roman catholics” and “catholics” two different groups. That is why you can not tell the difference (neither they can) In every part of the world, catholic is a catholic.....period.....but in this effort to “intellectualize” faith, this type of people try to put a label on everything. There is only one church that Jesus christ founded in 33 AD and that is the Roman Catholic and Apostolic church and still prevalent for 2000 plus year and you and I will be gone and the Roman Catholic and apostolic church will still be here for other 10,000 years
Jordan Cooper you seem to forgot the verse which said our lord said "I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.” in the time of the kings of Israel, the king would appoint a man to serve as his chief steward, who is literally given the keys of the kingdom, and can act in the name of the king if the king were absent. to the jews who would later become the first christians this was an obvious gesture that Christ gave St. Peter the authority as his vicar on earth, and furthermore in the years to follow, St. Peter is shown as a leader of the early Church, such as an instance on the day of Pentecost, when he adressed the people. In concusion there are evidence of the institution of the papacy.
Peter was the leader of the apostles. How does that transitions into Papal infallibility? Why would they call councils in the book of acts and the early church if they thought Peter’s opinion was always right? Why not just ask him lol
Perhaps you could do a more in depth video on the inconsistencies. I, for one, am quite interested (and, perhaps, in need of personally reflecting on it).
*Hermas of Rome 80 AD* “You will write two books, and you will send the one to Clements and the other two great. And Clements will send his to foreign countries, for permission has been granted to him to do so” The Shepherd 1:2:4 *St. Irenaeus of Lyons AD 189* "The blessed apostles, then having founded and built up the Church, committed into the hands of Linus the office of the episcopate" Against Heresies *Eusebius of Ceserea AD 312* "Victor… was the 13th Bishop of Rome from Peter" Church history 5:28:3 They don't end...
Hey, God bless you all, I am trying to discern either to become Lutheran or Catholic, I wanted to know if you could recommend videos, documentaries and books about Luther. I have a course about Luther, but is from a very critic Catholic priest, so I wanted to watch that after reading good and neutral things about Luther.
Think for yourself and ask God yourself with real intent which church to join. Still have whatever respect you can for other different believers that likely have a similar story of finding the one real truth. I'm positive various people of various faiths will say they found the "real" God. Yet, all of many different beliefs. I still doubt the answer is for all of us to fight, shun, and disrespect each other till we're all dead or one left standing.
@@bobbq8380 Hey brother, I believe Jesus is the only way, you know it was a beautiful and difficult time, I was left with just God, no assurance from men, just from the Word of God and Holy Spirit guiding me. God lead me to another level of life with Him months after. Now I feel more close to God. It was a hard moment, struggling with faith. Listen the music from Norton Hall Band He will Hold me fast
Guys speak truth in love. Some ppl I see here seem glad the others are wrong and want to bash them instead of persuade them to come to what they think is the truth. Truth and grace go together. Stop trolling we cant even have conversations without politeness. Neither compromise nor insult. Grow up
Do the math : One(Jesus is the Way, the Truth, and the Life) = One Jesus, One Way, One Truth and One Life Breakdown: One Savior, One Church, One Bread of Life with One Cup of Salvation Those who believe in Him believes what He says: Take this and eat it, for it is My Body, which will be give up for the forgiveness of sins. Take this cup and drink for it is My Blood, the blood of the new and everlasting covenant, the cup of Salvation. If you refuse to eat and drink then you refuse His gift of salvation.
@@Theaddekalk There is one way to heaven. There is one Truth. There is one Life. Yes they are one that's called the Holy Trinity. We can talk about one at a time.
@@34Packardphaeton Hearing=Listening=Obedience as in Simon Cephas translates to Obedient Rock. The new leader of the 12 Tribes of Israel. He was taught by Jesus what to teach others, that is why one needs to listen to the teachings of the Catholic Church. Don't forget that St Paul was an Apostle of the Catholic Church who taught the same message as the First Pope. Thank you.
... The original church of the Gospel of Jesus Christ.. eventually strayed from the true and genuine Gospel. The Roman Catholic church is not infallible; neither are they the same church today as the original church began by Christ with his apostles. Faith and salvation comes to individuals via the Holy Spirit --- it does not come via any church, least of all the church of Rome. Thank you.
I'm praying for you that you continue to your studies...the more you study the sooner you'll see the Truth. I for one am living a Catholic Life and won't trade it for the World.
Robert Sparkes, dont trade it for the world, trade it for the truth about God. I know you sincerely believe it is true, I too have been there, but I suggest you study the bible, learn church history, ask God to reveal truth. I recommend Fred Tarsitano especially his 9 part series on the original of the RCC. Blessings.
Hi, some catholics say that a valid sacrament always requires the participation of a catholic priest. What can we answer? Thanks, It's a huge question for me.
That is wrong...Anyone can legitimately baptize, as long as the correct form is used. And the intention is right. Even sn atheist can do it...As long as form, matter, snd intention are correct.
@@daviribeiro3032 sandy grogg you are partially right....the baptism can only be done in case of imminent death Anyone baptized can do the baptism In the catholic church only a priest can give a valid sacrament (baptism, confirmation, priesthood, Matrimony , confessions, eucharist, anointing of the sick) Other protestant groups pastor bob can do as he pleases but not in the catholic church.
I don't know. Why believe the early synods (e.g. the divinty of Jesus, the Nicene Creed, etc.) and the very body of scripture itself (selected from all the early writings) if not for a magisterium? And if this magisterium is not infallible (under guidance by the Spirit), might the Creed or scripture be wrong in some places? If the Spirit was infallible in selecting scripture and writing it, and in generating the Creed and other teachings, why would the Spirit stop guiding the church at some arbitrary point?
Why did the spirit stop guiding most of the religious Jews of Jesus day? Their people followed God since Moses/Abraham. True faith was seemingly what they lacked though. True faith in Christ is what saves is it not? Not Apostolic succession, and not tradition? A successively linked religious hierarchy since the apostles doesn't save either. It is God who saves all in Christ. It is a gift we do not merit or attain by our ability, or our actions and activities. Actions and activities are the outworking of faith, they do not cause salvation. To say your church group is the sole giver of salvation is to make yourself a kind of savior alongside God. But God has no need of people or any churches to help him save souls. He can as scripture says create Abraham's children from the rocks. Can he not make brothers and true believers in Christ the same way?
//Why believe the early synods (e.g. the divinty of Jesus, the Nicene Creed, etc.) and the very body of scripture itself (selected from all the early writings) if not for a magisterium?// Jesus expected people to be aware of and believe and understand the OT Scriptures and there was no religious magisterium at the time. With your Catholic understanding, how is this even possible?
Why would the spirit say that there is one mediator in scripture, then contradict itself through the roman church, by making Mary another mediator? Christ undoubtedly is enough. Yet the Magisterium of Rome thought christians needed another mediator to get right with God
@@geoffrobinson The "Magisterium" would have been local church leadership. The elders of the church. And once in awhile the bishops/elders would meet together for important issues.
Thank you, Jordan.. Im soo grateful that I can go straight to Our Lord Jesus Christ at anytime… ! And talk to him, Pray to him.and I have a deep Spiritual Relationship with him! Not just during my pray/ Quiet Time! I know Mary at Jesus’s Mother, a Precious lady, I have No need to worship or Pray to her!
#1 I hate authority (despite my bookshelf) #2 Saints can’t help you no matter how hard they pray for you. #3 John chapter 6 has no meaning. #4 because #5 drum roll…. the “dictionary”
It’s not the loss of the catholic church if you don’t want to be a catholic. There are so many pastors, ministers, preachers from other denominations converted to catholicism and they are apologists of the catholic church.
7:19, when the angel Gabriel greets Mary in Luke’s Gospel, Luke 1:28 he says - “Hail Mary full of grace, the Lord is with the.” “Blessed art thou amongst women and blessed is the fruit of thy womb..” Angel Gabriel acknowledges Mary as the mother of Jesus who was sent by the Heavenly Father. This is how we acknowledge Mary in the Catholic Church, just as Angel Gabriel did in the gospel. Mary is not equal to Jesus by any means but we acknowledge her importance as the mother of Jesus through the words in the gospel. Through the acknowledgement, we ask her to pray for us as she can bring us closer to our Father Jesus. Hope this clears your perspective on the Universal Catholic Church & God Bless.
thomas hess As Christians, we ask Mary to pray for us because we understand she is in heaven with our Lord. Now why pray to Mary in the first place? Because Jesus has given us his Blessed Mother as our great spiritual mother (Rev.12:17), a heavenly advocate who intercedes for us. Some Christians will ask, “Why pray to Mary when we can go directly to Jesus?” And yet they have no problem asking others here on earth to pray for them, instead of simply and solely praying to Jesus on their own. Indeed, St. Paul says that God grants blessings “in answer to many prayers” (2 Cor. 1:11). And if the prayer of a righteous man on earth avails much with God (Jas. 5:16-18), how much more would prayers from one who has finished the race and now reigns with Christ in heaven? Given their heavenly perfection in Jesus, which would include perfection in charity and thus concern for their brothers and sisters in Christ on earth (see 1 Cor. 2:12-26), we should not be surprised that Scripture presents these holy men and women of heaven bringing our prayers to Jesus the Lamb (Rev. 5:8), and that from the early Church onward Christians have asked the intercession of the saints who have gone before them to heaven. In this light, we see that the saints-as faithful disciples of Jesus-are his collaborators, not his competitors in interceding for us. Consequently, because Mary is the Mother of God and the disciple par excellence (see Luke 1:28, 38), we should not be surprised that she is our preeminent intercessor among the angels and saints.
Appreciate your clear reasoning why you believe as you do. As a Catholic my mind was thinking what would be my response to each as you spoke, which reaffirmed my love of having Church Fathers over 2000 years addressing each. Again enjoyed the way you presented your views!!
I think a far more compelling argument for the papacy is the fact that Jesus gives Peter the keys to the kingdom. In the Jewish kingdom, there was a man called the vicar to the king who literally carried around a massive set of keys. He was the man who spoke on the King’s behalf when he was gone. Jesus was assigning Peter that role.
Timothy Freeman He gave the keys to all the apostles, peter was a leader of the apostles and is the first among equals, but there’s no reason to believe that peter and his successors were able to speak truth infallibility from either scripture or early church tradition.
Timothy Freeman,I understand the Catholic reasoning for this. If Peter is now the new replacement for Jesus Christ and the HS and possibly Peter went to Rome, then the Bishop of Rome can day "I am the Holy One. You must all look to Me. I am the one bridge (holy pontiff) and there is no other" But fortunately St. Peter did write letters to the church and in I Pt. Ch. 5 v1 Peter clearly says he is an elder the same as the elders he writes to, not an elder of elders as some claim. All I need to do is read it. Plain and simple.
@@derekl4619 whether you like it or not or against what your pastor had told you....sorry to burst you bubble but i have to inform you that the bible was selected, approved, written by the christian catholics......year 317-330 ad.... Waaaay before you pastor and his church and Martin Luther even existed Truth huts man, truth hurts...
Jesus told Simon, his name now would be Petra or rock and upon this rock He would build His Church... and He(Jesus) would give Peter the Keys to His Kingdom. In those days when you gave some one keys to your house or property, you were making them overseer over your house/Kingdom.
He gave the same keys to all the Apostles later. Jesus, Paul, and Andrew founded the Eastern Orthodox Church. Jesus, Stephen, the eunuch, and Mark founded the Oriental Orthodox Church. Jesus, Thaddeus, Bartholomew and Thomas founded the Church of the East. Each one claims to be the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church. These claims are as legitimate as yours. Jesus also called Simon "Satan" shortly after calling him Petros. But Jesus never called the petra "Satan."
@@Mygoalwogel Who is Petra? And the eastern orthodox and Oriental orthodox were united with Rome at First. Where does Jesus give the keys to the other Apostels?
Όχι. Ο Πέτρος είναι ο Πέτρος και όχι η πέτρα. Η πέτρα είναι στο θηλυκό και η εκκλησία είναι επίσης στο θηλυκό και στον ενικό. Αυτό σημαίνει ότι ο Πέτρος σίγουρα δεν είναι η πέτρα πάνω στην οποία έχτισε ο Ιησούς την εκκλησία του
@@Mygoalwogelthat is so wrong. 1 by “initiating” the orthodox churches does not mean that Jesus gave them the keys of heaven. You have to understand that Jesus refers to heaven being where he returned, where he claimed to be coming from. He once said “my kingdom is not from this world”....so how Jesus gave the keys to found his kingdom on this world?..... You are so lost....unbelievable Jesus calls Peter “satan “.......yes I agree.....how many times have you though like Peter in your life?....Jesus in Matthew 16:-23 says “you are a stumbling block to me.....how many times have you be a stumbling block for someone? I will tell you myself.....many times.....and that means (according to Jesus) I have though like Satan....correct.... do you understand?...and I will tell you more about St Peter 1 he cut the ear of the high priest servant 2 he had a weak faith (he doubted when he was walking with Jesus in the water) 3 he denied Jesus not 1 not 2 but 3 times 4 he did not want jesus to wash his foot And guess what...... 1he was the only one that identified Jesus to be the son of god 2 Jesus gave them the keys of heaven to ONLY HIM 3 Jesus told him three times if he loved him and Jesus told him”feed my lambs” That guy my friend with all the human weaknesses and attributes and defects, is what is called the pope I think you are perfect to be saying things like “well he call him satan”....... get the full story and dont take things out of context
@@Mario-fs4ru The thing that refutes the popes is not their human defects but their contradiction of the truth. Lateran Council 1 Canon 21: We absolutely forbid priests, deacons, subdeacons, and monks to have concubines or to contract marriage. Lateran Council 2 Canon 6: For since they should be and be called the temple of God, the vessel of the Lord, the abode of the Holy Spirit, it is *unbecoming* that they *indulge in marriage* and in *impurities.* 1 Timothy 4:1-3 Now the Spirit expressly says that in later times some will depart from the faith by devoting themselves to deceitful spirits and *teachings of demons,* through the insincerity of liars whose consciences are seared, who *forbid marriage* 1 Corinthians 9:5 *Do we not have the right* to take along a believing wife, as do the other apostles and the brothers of the Lord and Cephas? Canon 21 continued: We decree in accordance with the definitions of the sacred canons, that *marriages already contracted by such persons must be dissolved,* and that the persons be condemned to do penance. Matthew 19:6 So they are no longer two but one flesh. What therefore God has joined together, let not man separate. Innocent III, 1204 "We destine specially to this, that the material sword may be sanctioned to supply the defect of the spiritual sword, and you, besides the temporal glory which you will attain from so pious and praiseworthy a work, may obtain that pardon for sins, which we grant as an indulgence for the remission of their sins, since we want those who faithfully shall have laboured against the heretics to rejoice in the same indulgence as we grant as an indulgence for those crossing the sea for the aid of the Holy Land." Lateran Council 4 Canon 3: Secular authorities, whatever office they may hold, shall be admonished and induced and if necessary compelled by ecclesiastical censure, that as they wish to be esteemed and numbered among the faithful, so for the defense of the faith they ought publicly to take an oath that they will strive in good faith and *to the best of their ability to exterminate* (pro viribus exterminare studebunt) in the territories subject to their jurisdiction all heretics pointed out by the Church. _Ad extirpanda_ of Pope Innocent IV: We decree that the head of state [...] shall observe, both what is written herein, and other regulations and laws both ecclesiastical and civil, that are published against heretical wickedness. [...] No heretical man or woman may dwell, sojourn, or maintain a bare subsistence in the country, or any kind of jurisdiction or district belonging to it, whoever shall find the heretical man or woman shall boldly seize, with impunity, all his or their goods, and freely carry them off. [...] The head of state, or whatever ruler stands foremost in the public esteem, must cause the heretics who have been arrested in this manner to be taken to whatever jurisdiction the Diocesan, or his surrogate, is in, or whatever district, or city, or place the Diocesan bishop wishes to take them to. [...] *The head of state or ruler **_must force_** all the heretics whom he has in custody, provided he does so without killing them or breaking their arms or legs* to confess their errors and accuse other heretics whom they know. Jesus gave the binding and loosing keys to all the Apostles in Matt 18:18.
1. In passage the word from Peter is Petros, the word for Rock is Petra. A difference 2. Peter, in his epistle, explains this comment. He tells us that Christ is the Rock, the chief cornerstone. We are living stones, part of the temple. That's in chapter 2 of 1 Peter 2:4-8
I’m on the fence about Catholicism, I am thinking of becoming Lutheran (from a nondenominational background) for many of the same reasons you’ve described…I wonder about the various miracles that have happened (Marian, Eucharistic, Stigmata, incorruptibility, etc…) in the Catholic Church. How do we explain these? Even if you’re skeptical about many of them, there are quite a few that are inexplicable. I’m just wondering what your take on this is? I’m only interested in our host’s opinion so please try to resist from responding to this if you’re not him.
This is his response. ua-cam.com/video/p-plm6mdkMM/v-deo.html I would also add something he doesn't say; namely, other Protestant denominations such as Pentecostal have many miracles, healings, deliverances, etc., too. Some have said the Marian apparitions 'could be' advanced technology, and it's possible it existed back then at the time of Fatima because there was even more advanced technology in certain past times than we have today.
Scott Hahn...if you go through his books/works...has gone through All of this quite a bit more thoroughly I would say...comes out for Catholicism in a very convincing/beautiful way..No approach is beyond reproach or perfect but I'll stick with my Catholic faith..Tks.anyhow. God bless.
Why did the POPE and bishops pay homage to a Mayan goddess at OCTOBER AMAZON SYNOD 2019? A BOWL dedicated to idol worzhip was on altar @st Peter basilica during Mass.
@@michaelciccone2194 This was outright heretical...Not to mention a total embarrassment. It was at this point that I began to consider leaving yfrcCstholic Church.Francis’ s obvious support for Biden...and his connection to China has befn disheartening, to say the least.
Honestly? I've always found his books to be theological light-weights. I read lots of theology books. Their depth and breadth are reflected in part by the index, and the number of pages. Hahn writes skinny little hard backs,...AND AT THAT THEY ARE DOUBLE SPACED (or one-and-a-half spaced). Yeash! Talk about propheteering off of next to nothing! They are little more than a magazine article in hardback! ...My seminary papers had more substance to them than any one of his books! There. I finally said it.
This video might be too old for someone to see this comment. If you do, can you give me the cheat sheet version of how a Lutheran might see the communion of the saints, as mentioned in this video?
The Roman Catholic Church 1. The Church is one. 2. The Church is Visible 3. The Church is Forever 4. The Church is Truth 5. The Church is messy. 6. The Church is a Kingdom 7. The Church is teacher 8. The Church is mystery 9. The Church is hierarchal 10. The Church is Holy 11. The Church is Apostolic 12. The Church is sacramental 13. The Church is Catholic 14. The Church is dynastic 15. The Church is mother 16. The Church is real. 17. The Church is authoritative 18. The Church is the bride of Christ. 19 The Church is the mystical body of Christ. 20. The Church is unchangeable.
How do you say about this “So Jesus said to them, "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink His blood, you have no life in yourselves” ( John 6,53)
In communion, Lutherans believe that it is the true body and blood of our Lord Jesus Christ under the bread and wine, for us as Christians to eat and to drink, instituted by Christ himself. See Matthew 26:26, 28.
No answers to my question yet? The response should be that no matter what Lutherans believe, (and these beliefs certainly do vary, as you know), during a Lutheran Service the bread and wine remain bread and wine. The Lutheran minister is not in the line of Apostolic Succession.
λόγος Απολογία exactly! I grew up Lutheran (now Roman Catholic) and I always wondered why we only believe in parts of different councils instead of the whole council. Protestantism/Lutheranism is quite silly when it come to Church history.
@@TheTrustingGamer Yeah, it reminds me of a St. Augustine quote. "If you are picking from a source, you are not using the source, you are the source." It's a logical inconsistency. Also, I'm Eastern Orthodox. (P.s type Jay Dyer on youtube). God Bless.
λόγος Απολογία that’s a good quote, and yeah I’ll search up Jay Dyer. I love Eastern Orthodoxy by the way, it’s the most beautiful liturgy in my opinion.
@@TheTrustingGamer Your learn alot about Orthodox Theology by Jay Dyer. Respond back, when you have watched some of his theological talks. And thankyou for that compliment.
Why does everyone go to the Catholic Church for exorcisms- at least the worst ones. A deamon will not leave the victim- until an Apostle- someone with apostolic authority- like the Bipshop over him gives authority For possessions by lower or middle level demons prostents can get by many times, but if Santan has a lot invested in the victim- protestants can't get the job done.
The apostles couldn't remove some demons even using the Holy name and they asked Jesus His reply was that some demons need to be prayed over. So that seems to back up what you say.
@@wolfthequarrelsome504 Matthew 17:18-20 is one time where the disciples couldn't drive out the demon. I think this is what you're referring to. I'm not entirely sure myself but my understanding was that they weren't strong enough in the faith to cast out the demon. It says that very clearly in Matthew 17:18-20 NIV (New International Version)
Of course, when Jesus was speaking to Mathew about being the rock is was not talking no one else but those who would understand the meaning of it, and the Jews knew exactly what he meant referring to Isaiah 22:22. I always wonder why we now in the 21 century want to understand something that was said to a specific people who would understand it and not for us to try to give our 21 century interpretation! When we say let the Bible interprete itself on passages like Mathew 16, we jus fail to understand the time it was said on, to whom it was said and why it was said.
Thank you for this short presentation which can not go in depth because of the time limit. Although I do not agree with everything you say I appreciate your honesty. What really is embarrassing are the personal attacks in the comments. Most of them are from Roman Catholics. This is a very bad testimony of ones own faith. These people behave as if they live in the 16th century and have to fight against Luther personally. At the moment I am very interested in the question of the credibility and the diversity between the "early fathers". I have found three points: 1. Paul warns us again and again that the church is threatened by wolves in sheep´s clothing etc. John is talking about the antichrists beginning to appear etc. The question that arises is why we can rely that "church fathers" and what they believed were not already corrupted to some extend at least. 2. When I listen to eastern orthodox theologians they cite "fathers" who differ from "catholic fathers". For example the question of how to understand the words of Jesus about Peter as rock was answered differently by "church fathers". Why should I follow one opinion and not another? 3. Jesus told us not to call anyone "father" but only the Father in Heaven. For me that is a clear warning to give any "spiritual leader" a spiritual authority to lead us as a father. Why did early Christianity very soon neglect this word of Christ? Yes, I see that Paul compares himself with a father. But maybe he did not know what Christ said in this regard. At least he did not ask believers to call him "father". Could you answer these questions?
@@opfipip3711 1. Reliable or not, we read the sermons and Bible notes of the church fathers and later Bible readers to balance out our own 20-21st century biases. The earlier readers are not necessarily better than later. 2. One reason Lutherans don't present tradition as an equal authority to Scripture is because the church fathers are capable of error. Scripture isn't. 3. I don't know what you mean.
Obviously I'm late to the party on this video, but I appreciate how clear you are on your positions. I would have probably switched out the prayers to the saints with the doctrines concerning Mary, (since I think they are far more cut and dry when looking at scripture) but still a good run down.
He was describing the more idolatrous aspect. Some of that disturbs me, when it comes to praying, kneeling and bowing to statues of saints. Another part is the Catholic notion of communion of the saints. It's all to heaven and wanting saints to pray for you, because they are seen as more righteous. The saints referred to in the bible are us though, the church, the members of the church and we are to pray for and comfort one another. The living get left for the dead in CAtholic communion of the saints.
I have replied at length to the first "papacy" portion of this video: "Reply to Jordan Cooper’s Rejection of the Papacy" [4-25-22] It's posted on my blog, "Biblical Evidence for Catholicism."
Please do a video on the Deuterocanon/Apocrypha, or the seven books that are included in the Catholic Bible but not included in the Protestant Bible. I think that would be a very good and interesting video. Even as a Protestant, I myself believe that the Deuterocanonical books are divinely inspired by God and that they should be included in The Bible.
"You are the ROCK and upon this ROCK".. obviously Jesus is referring to Peter... the Apostles have indeed appointed bishops.. So many doubts in your case.. but yeah, I respect your opinion... But when you read early church Fathers like Tertullian, Clement of Alexandria, Origen among others, they have touched on the Primacy of Peter among the Apostles.. clearly he was the leader.. and of course, when he died, he must have a successor to lead the flock.. that is where the Popes come in..
@Asaph Vapor "Not Many agreed".. WOW!!! Really!!! Well, Read These: Cyprian of Carthage : “The Lord says to Peter: ‘I say to you,’ he says, ‘that you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my Church.’ . . . On him [Peter] he builds the Church, and to him he gives the command to feed the sheep [John 21:17], and although he assigns a like power to all the apostles, yet he founded a single chair [cathedra], and he established by his own authority a source and an intrinsic reason for that unity. Indeed, the others were that also which Peter was [i.e., apostles], but a primacy is given to Peter, whereby it is made clear that there is but one Church and one chair. So too, all [the apostles] are shepherds, and the flock is shown to be one, fed by all the apostles in single-minded accord. If someone does not hold fast to this unity of Peter, can he imagine that he still holds the faith? If he [should] desert the chair of Peter upon whom the Church was built, can he still be confident that he is in the Church?” (The Unity of the Catholic Church 4; 1st edition [A.D. 251]). Ephraim the Syrian : “[Jesus said:] Simon, my follower, I have made you the foundation of the holy Church. I betimes called you Peter, because you will support all its buildings. You are the inspector of those who will build on Earth a Church for me. If they should wish to build what is false, you, the foundation, will condemn them. You are the head of the fountain from which my teaching flows; you are the chief of my disciples. Through you I will give drink to all peoples. Yours is that life-giving sweetness which I dispense. I have chosen you to be, as it were, the firstborn in my institution so that, as the heir, you may be executor of my treasures. I have given you the keys of my kingdom. Behold, I have given you authority over all my treasures” (Homilies 4:1 [A.D. 351]). Jerome : “‘But,’ you [Jovinian] will say, ‘it was on Peter that the Church was founded’ [Matt. 16:18]. Well . . . one among the twelve is chosen to be their head in order to remove any occasion for division” (Against Jovinian 1:26 [A.D. 393]). The Letter of Clement to James : “Be it known to you, my lord, that Simon [Peter], who, for the sake of the true faith, and the most sure foundation of his doctrine, was set apart to be the foundation of the Church, and for this end was by Jesus himself, with his truthful mouth, named Peter, the first fruits of our Lord, the first of the apostles; to whom first the Father revealed the Son; whom the Christ, with good reason, blessed” (Letter of Clement to James 2 [A.D. 221]). Origen : “[I]f we were to attend carefully to the Gospels, we should also find, in relation to those things which seem to be common to Peter . . . a great difference and a preeminence in the things [Jesus] said to Peter, compared with the second class [of apostles]. For it is no small difference that Peter received the keys not of one heaven but of more, and in order that whatsoever things he binds on earth may be bound not in one heaven but in them all, as compared with the many who bind on earth and loose on earth, so that these things are bound and loosed not in [all] the heavens, as in the case of Peter, but in one only; for they do not reach so high a stage with power as Peter to bind and loose in all the heavens” (Commentary on Matthew 13:31 [A.D. 248]). Tertullian : “For though you think that heaven is still shut up, remember that the Lord left the keys of it to Peter here, and through him to the Church, which keys everyone will carry with him if he has been questioned and made a confession [of faith]” (Antidote Against the Scorpion 10 [A.D. 211]). “[T]he Lord said to Peter, ‘On this rock I will build my Church, I have given you the keys of the kingdom of heaven [and] whatever you shall have bound or loosed on earth will be bound or loosed in heaven’ [Matt. 16:18-19]. . . . Upon you, he says, I will build my Church; and I will give to you the keys, not to the Church” (Modesty 21:9-10 [A.D. 220]). Cyprian of Carthage : “The Lord says to Peter: ‘I say to you,’ he says, ‘that you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my Church, and the gates of hell will not overcome it. And to you I will give the keys of the kingdom of heaven . . . ’ [Matt. 16:18-19]. On him [Peter] he builds the Church, and to him he gives the command to feed the sheep [John 21:17], and although he assigns a like power to all the apostles, yet he founded a single chair [cathedra], and he established by his own authority a source and an intrinsic reason for that unity. Indeed, the others were that also which Peter was [i.e., apostles], but a primacy is given to Peter, whereby it is made clear that there is but one Church and one chair. . . . If someone does not hold fast to this unity of Peter, can he imagine that he still holds the faith? If he [should] desert the chair of Peter upon whom the Church was built, can he still be confident that he is in the Church?” (The Unity of the Catholic Church 4; 1st edition [A.D. 251]). “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 has gathered elsewhere is scattering” (Letters 43[40]:5 [A.D. 253]). “There [John 6:68-69] speaks Peter, upon whom the Church would be built, teaching in the name of the Church and showing that even if a stubborn and proud multitude withdraws because it does not wish to obey, yet the Church does not withdraw from Christ” (ibid., 66[69]:8). Ephraim the Syrian : “[Jesus said:] ‘Simon, my follower, I have made you the foundation of the holy Church. I betimes called you Peter, because you will support all its buildings. You are the inspector of those who will build on earth a Church for me. If they should wish to build what is false, you, the foundation, will condemn them. You are the head of the fountain from which my teaching flows; you are the chief of my disciples’” (Homilies 4:1 [A.D. 351]). Ambrose of Milan : “[Christ] made answer: ‘You are Peter, and upon this rock will I build my Church. . . . ’ Could he not, then, strengthen the faith of the man to whom, acting on his own authority, he gave the kingdom, whom he called the rock, thereby declaring him to be the foundation of the Church [Matt. 16:18]?” (The Faith 4:5 [A.D. 379]). “It is to Peter that he says: ‘You are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my Church’ [Matt. 16:18]. Where Peter is, there is the Church. And where the Church is, no death is there, but life eternal” (Commentary on Twelve Psalms of David 40:30 [A.D. 389]).
To whom was Jesus referring five verses later, when He addresses Peter as "Satan"? Jesus was - obviously - referring not to Peter, who later denied Him three times, but what Peter said, in both verses.
Thank you! Informative and not abusive. Makes me proud to be a Lutheran. But I would probably have the Marian doctrines among the 5 instead of Sacrifice of the Mass. In spite of the errors I think there are many true Christians also among the Catholics. We are all coloured by our background and have white spots in our understanding. Still we can be God´s children.
MARIANNE HEDSTROM----Do you know that Luther had a very strong devotion to Mary ? Do you know that he took books out of the bible ? He wanted to remove "James" but cooler heads restrained him ! Your bible is missing about seven books ! Do you read all these curses hurled at the Catholic church for having confession ? You have confession. Many Lutheran ministers and people are becoming Catholic by studying the early church teachings, believing their bibles and rejecting the hatred of the RCC. in Protestantism. The Holy Sacrifice of the Mass is unchanged since 33AD. !
DAVID ORTIZ-----Anything our Saviour's church, that is guided by the Holy Spirit, does, must be discarded, according to A/VAPOR. HE promised to be with it for ever but it must not do anything, say anything or have Peter's successors say one word even though it is guided by the Holy Spirit. Have you heard the rumour that the Holy Spirit is guiding 30K to 40K bickering, disagreeing, bible-verse changing Protestant churches ? I am not sure about the 2.3 new Protestant churches that are springing up every day. [ Wikipedia ]
@Asaph Vapor I am talking about history. You are talking about what you want to believe. These pages are jammed with " it must be true, I want to believe it" !
@Asaph Vapor IT is AN HISTORICAL FACT, NOT AN OPINION, THAT LUTHER WANTED TO REMOVE "JAMES" FROM THE BIBLE. CHECK IT OUT ! He wanted tp remove it because he did NOT agree with it ! ! ! [ stonehead ! ! ]
Thank you, Pastor Jordan. Your video came at a very blessed time for me. I agree with all points. For me the two more aggregiously awful and unexplainable or debatable doctrines of Rome are the Marian doctrines and the doctrine of purgatory and the treasury of merit. While praying to the saints is, in and of itself, unbiblical in my mind, the extra step that Catholics take in adoring and trusting in Mary's mediation, instead of Christ's, is just abhorrent to me. And the idea that there is a purgatory in between this world and heaven, is again not only unscriptural, but it is just so cruel. To tell people that when they die Christ's work of justification is not enough for them to be with the Lord, and furthermore to tell their faithful that they must burden themselves with prayers for the dead to get them out of purgatory faster, and the giving of indulgences with the idea that the church has the powerr to spill over some merit onto their dead loved ones, or themselves, to get them to heaven faster, is just downright satanic in my view. Not to say that Catholics are Satanic- I know many Catholics who love Jesus fervently. I am just grieved that Rome has put these burdens and obstructions in their path to communion with Christ. And that is why, though I too grow weary of the divisions in protestantism and find some of the beauty and tradition and sacramental nature of the Roman church appealing, I could never be a Roman Catholic. Thank you again for your insightful video.
@FaithHopeGrace You: Co-Redemptix- the 5Th Marian which means the salvation/mediator of souls, equal to the Lord, Me: As usual, a Protestant sets up a straw man argument and then crushes it. Congratulations, you have won a fantasy argument. But you haven't laid a finger on what Catholics really believe. I too would condemn your straw man. Now, back to reality.
@FaithHopeGrace I believe all that the Catholic Church teaches. Every Catholic would say the same or he would no longer be Catholic. Yes, it might become dogma. I hear about it far more from critical Protestants than I do from any Catholic source.
My mother in law, in her last illness, was not looking forward to meeting her Redeemer. She was terrified of purgatory. Our pastor counseled her. She died a Lutheran.
Well, if we read that Jesus gave the keys to Peter to bind and loose, then we understand the papacy. It is very easy to understand, the thing is whether we are enough humble to accept it.
This was a nice video, doing more like this is welcomed. I completely agree with you that the doctrine of justification is the main reason not to be Catholic. But I also think that your 4th reason is what underlines everything. The idea that theology can change and, in fact, can depart from what is taught in the Bible is for me the biggest fundamental issue with Catholicism.
+Wanttoknowabout +Jordan Cooper -- *_"...the doctrine of justification is the main reason not to be Catholic."_* Yup! That's why I have not and never will re-embrace the spiritual tradition of my youth. I would have preferred that Jordan tackled the doctrine of justification way in the beginning, but I have started to think that being the very last point made much more sense. This might be neither here nor there but I will tack it on here if for no other reason than to show a few links I share on occasion elsewhere. I have done so over at the predominantly conservative social media platform *GAB* roughly two or three times within the past few weeks. I get along with most Roman Catholics; but I also rub shoulders with traditionalist folks in Alt-Right and Ethno-Nationalist circles and need to remind some of them why I have certain problems with Roman Catholicism. That includes Eastern Orthodoxy. *_"Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification"_* en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joint_Declaration_on_the_Doctrine_of_Justification *_"A Betrayal of the Gospel: The Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification"_* by *Paul T. McCain* -- *_First Things_* www.firstthings.com/blogs/firstthoughts/2010/03/a-betrayal-of-the-gospel-the-joint-declaration-on-the-doctrine-of-justification *_"LCMS - The Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification in Confessional Lutheran Perspective"_* www.lcms.org/Document.fdoc?src=lcm&id=339 *_What Lutherans Believe about Salvation_* by *Jordan Cooper* ua-cam.com/video/vedNLmLSbSo/v-deo.html *_"Does James disagree with Paul on Justification? An Exegetical Comparison of Romans 3.27-43 & James 2.14-26"_* (2014) by *Nathaniel F. Walther* www.wlsessays.net/bitstream/handle/123456789/51/Walther.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y *_Iustitia Dei: A History of the Doctrine of Justification_* [3rd Ed.] (2005) by *Alister McGrath* furfeathersntales.files.wordpress.com/2017/05/iustitia_dei__a_history_of_the_christian_doctrine_of_justification.pdf ^^^^^One might have to bring up that PDF through another browser beside Google Chrome. Rounding things out.... *_Can a Consistent Eastern Orthodox Believer Be the Bible Answer Man?_* by *James White* of *_Alpha & Omega Ministries_* ua-cam.com/video/F5EPs9EqIsc/v-deo.html *_Mary: Sinless Queen of Heaven or Sinner Saved by Grace?_* *Robert Sungenis* vs. *Tony Costa* _(video courtesy of Acts17Apologetics)_ ua-cam.com/video/Wus6CrzleRw/v-deo.html
Response to the Papacy arguments - If the early church understood Matt 16 as Peter or his faith without reference to successors, why then did the church claim to have successors to St Peter in the Papacy? Why does the early church writings have to clearly state doctrines that are later held in church history? Cannot the Holy Spirit guide the church over time to have a deeper appreciation of the biblical texts? Jesus did promise the Holy Spirit to guide the church into all truth. Cardinal John Henry Newman's understanding of church history on the development of doctrine may assist you in this regard. Response to the Saints - Jordan rejects the papacy based upon no early church witness, but he also rejects praying to the saints when there is an early church witness. Jordan's criteria for rejecting the Catholic church is clearly not based upon any witness or lack of witness in the early church. Praying to the saints is not worship, but dulia as honor. Correct worship of God is latria through sacrifice. Jordan claims prayer to the saints leads to idolatry, but Catholic teaching clearly distinguishes between prayer to the saints and the worship of God, thereby preventing idolatry. Jordans lack of support from scripture is irrelevant because the Catholic church does not follow the false theory of sola scriptora. Sacrifice of the Mass - Hebrews does discuss the resurrected Christ acting as a priest in the order of Melchizedek who offers gifts and sacrifices in the heavenly sanctuary. Hebrews does speak of the ongoing activity of Jesus offering himself as a sacrifice (Heb 9:23) to cleanse the sanctuary, which consistent with the mass. If there is no more sacrifice after the cross, how does Jesus continue to act as a priest forever as Hebrews says? What are yo to make of the gospel accounts of the institution of the Eucharist and the historical witness of Christ in the Eucharist? Why believe anything Luther taught about the Eucharist when he had no authority and came up wit many novel doctrines about all things Christian? Infallible Magisterium - Jordan Rome is not the same by comparing Bellarmine and Karl Rahner. But Rahner has no athority in the church at all other than a theologian. Rome position does not change because Rahaner taught something different to Bellarmine or Trent. Trent's claims account for the development of doctrine, which means Trent did take into account changes over time within the church on matters of doctrine. Rome can make statements to explain church doctrine in diverse ways to account for different aspects of doctrine and doctrinal development. Justification - Faith alone theology is only an eisegesis of a select number of passages which has many problems. Justification is really i a covenant setting and any reference to a judgement must be understood within the covenant between the Father and humanity through Jesus as the mediator. St Paul repeatedly speaks of being in Christ as transformational language. The gospel is the new Exodus, new creation, new covenant, restoration of Israel and the ingathering of the nations to Zion, focussed on the church as the new Israel with the Eucharist at the centre. The gospel is not justification by faith alone - Faith is not an instrument, but a habit and an act. There never was any imputation of man's sins to Christ's account. There is never any imputation of Christ's merit to the sinners account. There never was any great exchange which involves any legal fiction. Faith is always an act that infers a union with hope and love, contrary to Luther's doctrine. Works of the law refer to covenant works, or any work of grace. If so, faith alone theology is false, for faith is a work of grace, excluded by faith alone theology. Rom 4 refers to both faith (Rom 4:3) and hope (Rom 4:18) and Davids (Ps 32) conversion as a resurrection to new life. This is hardly the language of faith alone and extrinsic righteousness.
I found recently this article about Justification. I thinks it will like you: chnetwork.org/2020/01/29/a-damning-system-of-works-righteousnesspart-i-are-catholics-even-christian/
@@efraincastro7214 There are no solas in the bible. The entire solas based system is a fiction. The works St Paul refers to are works of the Mosaic law, or works without grace. Faith alone is a fiction.
I agree with you on points 1, 2, 4, 5. Nevertheless, I do not agree with your point 3. In Hebrews 13:10, "altar" would be meaningless - just as our use of the same word for the Eucharistic table - without the idea of the Mass being a representation of the only sacrifice of the cross. Moreover, the Roman Canon was composed on basis of the Epistle to Hebrews, see Fr Matthew Olver, "Hoc Est Sacrificium Laudis: The Influence of Hebrews on the Origin, Structure, and Theology of the Roman Canon Missae". I would also add that God is beyond the time-space, and that the Eucharist is the way by which we, creatures limited to the time-space, have access to the timeless unique sacrifice of Christ on the cross. Otherwise, "a Priest FOR EVER after the order of Melchizedek" is meaningless. The "intercession" of Heb. 7:25 is also a continuous action.
It's the job of the enemy sniper to take down the lead man of an army. Jesus knows that. That's why He said these words to Peter: “Simon, Simon, Satan has asked to sift all of you as wheat. But I have prayed for you, Simon, that your faith may not fail. And when you have turned back, strengthen your brothers.” Luke 22:31 Noticed that Jesus specifically addressed Peter, among the Twelve. Why? That's why I remain a Catholic. Peace
@TRUST IN CHRIST CONFÍA EN CRISTO I am afraid the above reply doesn't explain why the enemy sniper puts the lead man - in particular - onto his cross-hair. A *headless* church is not found in the divine blue-print of the Church when Christ formed it 20 centuries ago. That is why I remain a Catholic. Peace
@TRUST IN CHRIST CONFÍA EN CRISTO True, Christ is the head of His Church, but He made Peter His in-charge. In Luke 22:31, Christ specifically addressed Peter among the Twelve, letting him know that the enemy sniper would put him in his cross-hair. He further assured Peter of His prayers that his faith will not fail. In addition, Jesus directed Peter to 'strengthen' the rest of his brothers. For the other 11 apostles watching as the scene unfolded before them, there's no mistaking Christ's intention for Peter. This is why a church without a head cannot be the true blueprint of Christ's Church. This is why I remain a Catholic. Peace
@@econs999 When the current pope says catholics worship the same God as the muslims, do you find that strengths your faith along with the faith of your fellow catholics?
@@prayunceasingly2029 Catholics and Muslims worshipped the one God of "Abraham, Isaac and Jacob" and sought to do God's will. To that extent, the pope is not wrong in his comment. And to that extent, he is not watering down the Catholic faith. This, by the way, is what is meant by the statement that "3 religions share the same Abrahamic faith" ie the Jewish faith, the Muslim faith and the Christian faith. Why? Because in each religion's scripture you will find the characters of Abraham (the father of faith), Isaac, Moses. Why, even Mary is accepted by all these 3 religions as the mother of Jesus. So, at its root, all 3 religions overlap, though not completely to be sure. Peace
@Asaph Vapor You say Muslim do not believe in the same GOD because *they do not believe in the resurrection of Jesus and the Trinity* . I agree with you. It is just that you didn't read carefully enough my comment that Muslims share the same _Abrahamic_ faith of the Jews and Catholics. Meaning, the faith father Abraham had then didn't include the resurrection of Jesus nor the Trinity too. All he knew then was that there was ONE sovereign God who he is called to worship. Same for the Jews. Same for Catholics. Peace
@Chad _Monarch Haven't read much I've written, have ya. I left the RCC long ago, became Prot. Read allot. Went to Baptist seminary. Read allot. Returned to RCC. ...But that doesn't mean I don't see that huge problems in it in our era.
You’re a great lecturer Two quick questions… 1. How many Eucharistic miracles has any other church experienced? 2. Was God wrong for asking Moses to create a bronze serpent because they eventually worshiped it?
1) The Eucharistic miracle in itself does not justify anything. 2) What happened to the bronze serpent? He was destroyed as soon as they worshiped him in 2 Kings 18:4
@@CamminareSulleAcque so you’re agreeing the miracles take place but you’re saying satan is responsible or God performing miracles by placing his own blood into the bread is not important?
If the catholic church is being criticized for 2000 plus years....it must be touching sensitive nerves societies now a-days can not with withstand...so much that they create their own churches 🤦🏽♂️
Just a correction on two errors presented in the first couple of minutes. Both have to do with the Papacy. #1 Jesus said to Peter 'You are Kepha, and on this Kepha, I will build my church". There is nothing in the phrase that points to another interpretation. The Petras vs Petros argument is invalid, as there is no way the Greek language allows for Peter to be given a name with a feminine ending (Petras). It would be as if Jesus was calling Peter "Roquelle" or such. #2 There is definitely evidence that Jesus meant for Peter's office of Pope to have successors. The OT scripture Jesus is referencing when he tell Peter that he will have the "Keys to the Kingdom", is in Isaiah, when King David is speaking to Eliakim, his Prime minister, to whom he gives the "keys to the Kingdom". This office of Prime minister is one that has successors and one that does not disappear after the current Prime minister dies. With the Keys, Jesus made Peter his prime minister, and every 1st century Jew would have understood that this was an office to be perpetuated after Peter's death.
Let’s see Jesus died for our sins and handed off the church to a series of evil murderous Popes who traditionally believe they are god Popes have allowed and encouraged abuse of nuns and children with rapes They have covered it up and protect guilty priests. Why would Jesus die on the cross if you can pray to a pope saint or mother goddesses Mary. Fatima Guadeloupe
Seems like a smart and sincere guy. Perhaps this format doesn't allow for the depth these issues require. For example, regarding the early Church and the papacy; that was a running broad jump over Irenaeus from Ignatius to Nicaea. www.textexcavation.com/irenaeusah3.html#chapter3 That said, I found the Bellarmine/Vatican 2 commentary to be rather astute.
Is. 22 in that day, I will call My servant Eliakim the son of Hilkiah; 21 I will clothe him with your robe And strengthen him with your belt; I will commit your responsibility into his hand. He shall be a father to the inhabitants of Jerusalem And to the house of Judah. 22 The key of the house of David I will lay on his shoulder; So he shall open, and no one shall shut; And he shall shut, and no one shall open. 23 I will fasten him as a peg in a secure place, And he will become a glorious throne to his father’s house.
I'm a catholic who appreciates your clarity and conviction. Thank you, sir.
Well, Lance, now what are you gonna do ? Do you find his points convincing, or only clear and said with conviction ? I"m an ex-Catholic, and agree with Jordan on most points. But I have an advanced degree in Religion from a Baptist univ.
I am not as tempted to leave the Catholic Church by Jordan as I am by our horrible current Pontiff, but I reckon I'll stay put for the time being.
I'm not Roman Catholic I'm Oneness Apostolic just checking in my parents were RCC in Mexico but there same as me mexican American chicanon
@@LuciusClevelandensis Interesting, so you reject the Biblical doctrine of Justification, Sanctification and Glorification?
Protestants still believes servant is greater than a master.
So here are his reasons:
1:12 The Papacy
5:40 The Saints
8:41 The Sacrifice of the Mass
11:47 The Inconsistency of the Church
14:48 Justification
Thanks that helps a lot 🙂👍
@@silversurfer2703 You're welcome! 🙂🙂🙂
Very cool and based
Don't forget they murdered Martin Luther and Christians during the Dark Ages if they didn't go along with their doctrine... Protestant churches have forgotten why they fled to the wilderness.
@@jennifertinker985 well ...Martin Luther was a dangerous heretic ...🤣🤣
He did tremendous harm to the church , even today countless souls are in danger because of his beliefs . In America , you get the death penalty for one murder or more so I can have sympothy for a man and his followers condemned who can cause the loss of millions and future billions if souls .
I appreciate this video. You understand Catholic theology well and rationalize your point of view without trash talking Catholics at all. Many Protestant UA-camrs I view fall into the stereotypes on how they see Catholics, so it’s hard for me, as a Catholic to ever see Protestants present their views vs Catholic views because they don’t even understand the other side. This video was interesting and caught my attention the whole time.
Are you Catholich ? I am Catholich .
@@bestofburden Why ?
It’s indeed refreshing to hear a sophisticated critique on Catholicism instead of senseless bible bashing even though I don’t agree with his views i appreciate his use of “I think” before his sentences as it implies his ideas come from a more personal view point. The traditional Latin Catholic liturgy is still the most powerful form of worship in my experience having attended multiple Protestant and modern Catholic masses. I find the Protestant critique is strictly biblical which I struggle with as my view on the bible is it’s undeniably the will/word of God but it’s spoken though man which leaves it wide open to interpretation and interpretations can get really messy. I feel most judgements made on Catholic rites and rituals are rather shallow interpretations of “the right way to pray” which is ironic coming from Lutherans as my understanding Luther claimed that one must have Faith in God above all doctrines. So if one has faith in god then rites and rituals are rather trivial. Deo Gràtias 🙏
@@bestofburden Are you Catholich ?
Benjamin Flynn You are entitled to your opinion, but the criticism can be sort of “debunked.” The audience is a more casual audience is mainly Christian, you shouldn’t expect for him to go overly in depth in Catholic theology. What he did mention as far as Catholic Theology is true, he didn’t use his Lutheran bias to take away the facts, which is something many people do when they speak of the other viewpoint. The video was already long, if he went in depth on Catholic theology he’d get off topic and be missing the point of the video, making it excessively long with unnecessary facts that are unrelated to the topic.
I was an atheist for my entire life. Started studying the Bible and watching videos and praying and it brought me to Jesus. I searched the denominations and I found the Lutheran Missouri synod to fit the best. They kept the good things about the Catholic Church but cleansed the nonsense. I studied Roman Catholic a ton because my wife was a Roman Catholic. Found a lot of inconsistency and contradictory between catholic teachings and their extra books. I could go on and on. But a lot of what he’s saying plus what others have said is simply why.
I am an orthodox but Wdym by extra books. Are u referring to the catholic deutrocanon??? If it is, the deutrocanon was part of scripture even during the reformation movement. Martin Luther didnt remove the deutrocanonical books but the later protestants are actually the ones that removed the books from the canon. And they also were quoted in the NT.
Extra books? You mean the books in the Septuagint which Christ and the Apostles used, which were considered inspired for the first 1500 years of Christianity by both Catholics and most Orthodox? Did you know Luther contemplated removing James, Revelations and possibly even Hebrews from the New Testament canon?
Recently I went to a Lutheran Church for the first time. BEST Church i have ever been to. Like you said, it had everything I love and admire about Catholics (tradition, liturgy/worship) while keeping out the Catholic practices and theology that isn't Biblically supported. I think I have moved on from the Baptist denomination and will be transitioning to Lutheran :) It is a lovely Church
Nice! I’m LCMS too and saw the same issues with catholic theology. I love Lutherans for being doctrinally closest to the early church (100 AD)
@@KoiDotJpegI'm also considering Lutheran. On 11/25/23 Jesus Christ spoke to me and my life changed in that moment of time. I was raised Christian but for a number of reasons, turned away from God. When he spoke to me, I completely understand so much, I received a "knowing". I've been looking for a church to join and Lutheran seems very good. Wish me luck and good luck to you in finding your home.
I was raised in a a Lutheran church (was baptized Catholic because my grandfather wanted my parents to do that) I’ve considered joining Catholicism before before watching you my theological understanding of Lutheranism was mediocre at best. The only thing that stopped me from switching is how bitter and angry Catholics are when you talk about theological differences between Protestants and Catholics
As a Protestant you may also want to look at the other side of angry baptists and evangelicals who are very anti catholic… I don’t think one’s views of another denomination should determine whether or not you agree or disagree theologically. This is coming from a Protestant.
a basic and pejorative generalization is not a great reason to base the choice of your entire faith on. i hope you have a little more than that
@@lukasg9031 exposing the false Gospel id rime is not hate
You may want to research Martin Luther more. I am an ex-Lutheran. He was a wicked and blasphemous man who blasphemed Our Lord Jesus Christ and claimed unspeakably wicked things about Him that I cannot even type because they are so horrific. He also spoke often to the devil and records his (very disturbing, graphic, and vulgar) interactions with the devil in his writings.
Short video on who he really was: ua-cam.com/video/xL2Hyve-kwg/v-deo.html
Long video on who he really was: ua-cam.com/video/KQU8zPDdk8E/v-deo.html
The true Faith is the unchanged Catholic Faith, not the "Catholic Church" down the street with the liberal novus ordo priests dancing around (depending on where you live, some are more conservative than others) but the true unchanged Catholic Church. The current state of the true Church is a state of sede-vacante, meaning the chair of St. Peter is currently vacant as there is no valid Pope. Francis is a false pope. This website explains it: novusordowatch.org/
No servant is greater than a master
As a Lutheran convert to Catholicism, I appreciate your firm, yet respectful videos. It's quite ironic that the Lutheranism I departed (female priests, homosexual clergy, etc..) is becoming fashionable among the prelates in Rome. Seemingly, a chasm exists between the pre and post Vatican II Church.
Separately, I would love to see a respectful debate and discussion with you, Dr. Taylor Marshall (Catholic), and Fr. Josiah Trenham (Orthodox.)
Cheers,
Erik
But, if you are not happy being a Catholic, I'm sure the Lutheran Church would take you back.
@@Lepewhi one should never leave Truth (Christ's Church) for error (Luther's church).
... Erik... Did Luther, Huss, Zwingli, Wycliffe.. risk their lives.. for you to betray them by becoming part of Rome?? I say that you should swim AWAY in the Tiber.. and return to the Biblical TRUTH... for the sake of your soul.
Is there any particular reason that you did no join the LCMS rather than the Catholic Church,as the LCMS dont have female priests, homosexual clergy, etc..?
Roman Papism is heretical too. Read: khristosanesti.blogspot.com/2020/04/the-falsehoods-of-papism-las-falsedades.html
I’m non-denominational and considering Lutheranism. These videos have been very informational and straightforward. I like the unedited format. Just turn on the camera, and talk about your perspective. It’s refreshing. I also think you did a good job clearly presenting your points without being needlessly hurtful to Catholics. Great video.
I was 4 square which runs many of the nondenominational churches. I am now LCMS, be careful the ELCA is about as Lutheran as FedEx is federal (not at all).
What drew me to LCMS was that the nondenominational churches have no real roots to keep them consistent, or in some cases biblical, and they always felt like churches where you never really got out of Sunday school. You can color only so many pictures of Noah’s arc before you start asking more questions.
Lutheranism is based on studies of the church’s that the original apostles set up and is very heavy on studying the Bible as a whole instead of memorizing a few out of context scriptures or often mistakenly using little Christian idioms that are not even in the Bible.
What is funny is that you can go back to some of the earliest CATHOLIC Churches and study them and that is essentially what you see in a Lutheran service (note all caps CATHOLIC refers to the early Christian church as opposed to Catholic which is a specific church).
In fact Martin Luther didn’t call himself a Lutheran but rather a reformed Catholic.
We were the original “reject modernity” movement as we broke away from Catholicism to return to the old ways and scripture.
if you haven’t decided yet, RUN to Lutheranism. My bf and i were non denominational until about 2 months ago and then started attending a Lutheran church after months of looking into different denominations because of the surface level watered down theology at our ND church. changed our lives forever. we’re in the process of becoming members in the church and the stuff we’re learning about the denomination is so refreshing. we go to a WELS church because it’s what was around us and we appreciate the more conservative traditions and values they hold. it’s what Christianity was and should be. 10/10 would recommend Lutheranism. an amazing change from the powerpoints and watered down gospels we used to get 🙌🏻
Infant baptism is not biblical
@@albusai Col 2:11-12
If baptism is the new circumcision and circumcision was to be done 8 days after birth then it follows that baptism is as well.
Also early churches, like the original 12 apostles churches if baptizing a pregnant woman had her return and baptize the baby.
So no it doesn’t directly say it but it was a procedure in the first Christian churches
@@albusai It may be more biblical than we know. The bible talks of adult converts that were called to be baptized. I don't see anything wrong w/ infant baptism now though.
I don't think you can talk about the power of the Papacy without referring to the historical circumstances. The entire west was under Rome's jurisdiction while the east was split between 4 other Patriarchs. Later on 3 of them fell to Islam while the 4th was under the Emperors of Constantinople. It's not hard to see how that left the Papacy out on its own, so to speak. No wonder that Popes were able to secure so much power over the Church as it existed in Latin-speaking Europe.
Yes, and then when Rome fell and in the absence of the secular government the Church found itself the only organization that had educated leaders that the people looked to for guidance -- it resulted in the church having to assume roles it was never meant to have to take on. I do believe that was the start of many of the problems that lead to the reformation. 🙏✝️🙏
Man, I was once Catholic and those are basically my reasons too. I would almost become Lutheran if not for the view of election.
which way do you lean on that? I am also former Roman, but then leaned more reformed , then found the Lutheran view of election faithful to scriptural ideas since it was willing to follow the twists and turns of scripture on the matter.
@@ChrisB-ms8cd More on the Arminian side
@@user-se3zq2hn6t impossible since Luther was before Arminius.
Man, Im a catholic and always will be.
Colin, sorry for your loss
Oh yeah, both the "Papal infallibility" and "Intercession of the Saints" are two of the most difficult dogma/doctrine and/or doctrine/dogma to wrap my head around.
Because they are baseless and made up to set a structure of power and control. The Catholic Church is infamous for exploiting ambiguity in scripture and tradition to deviate from sound doctrine. Do your research on "Intercession of the saints" and you will see how the church stretched tradition very thin to reach that conclusion, and how there were no such practices in early Christianity, before church became the state.
There is a stark contrast between the primitive church and the imperial one.
both of them are unbiblical and sinful
no human is infallible, only God
and "intercession of the saints" is completely made up
the bible says their is ONE mediator: Jesus Christ
praying to dead people is necromancy
I’ve watched several of your videos and enjoy them. Will you make (or have you already made) one explaining the differences between the various Lutheran groups?
Thanks so much bro. Been trying to think through all this. Your clip was super helpful and a soothing balm to the soul.
I am Lutheran Deacon have a friend a Roman Catholic priest (in Italy) tells me I'm more Catholic than he is.
@Project That is Life pretty sure he means small c as opposed to large C
Lutherans don't have deacons.
@@johnmarquardt1991 i can introduce you to dozen in my local area if you like. Nearly half of lcms churchs in the western district have deacons not pastors. Not enough pastors to go around
@@colnagocowboy Our district did away with what you call deacons. The problem in your area is that you will not pay pastors enough money -- you're cheap. Kansas had the same problem.
@@johnmarquardt1991 obviously your opinion is more omportant to you than reality so as the English would say sod off
Petros v petra debate is absolutely lacking legs omitting the fact this entire original conversation was in Aramaic. Moreover Jesus uses the singular “you” when saying "I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; and whatever you bind on earth shall have been bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall have been loosed in heaven."
Also why, if this conversation is insignificant and “misinterpreted” by Catholics, is there so many Early Church Fathers that indicate a special primacy to the Church in Rome?
Clement of Rome
Accept our counsel and you will have nothing to regret. . . . If anyone disobeys the things which have been said by him [Jesus] through us, let them know that they will involve themselves in no small danger. We, however, shall be innocent of this sin and will pray with entreaty and supplication that the Creator of all may keep unharmed the number of his elect (Letter to the Corinthians 58:2, 59:1[A.D. 95]).
Ignatius of Antioch
You [the See of Rome] have envied no one, but others have you taught. I desire only that what you have enjoined in your instructions may remain in force (Epistle to the Romans 3:1 [A.D. 110]).
Irenaeus
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 [inter A.D. 189]).
Clement of Alexandria
[T]he blessed Peter, the chosen, the preeminent, the first among the disciples, for whom alone with himself the Savior paid the tribute [Matt. 17:27], quickly grasped and understood their meaning. And what does he say? “Behold, we have left all and have followed you” [Matt. 19:2 7, Mark 10:28] (Who is the Rich Man that is Saved? 21:3-5 [A.D. 200]).
Tertullian
[T]he Lord said to Peter, “On this rock I will build my Church, I have given you the keys of the kingdom of heaven [and] whatever you shall have bound or loosed on earth will be bound or loosed in heaven” [Matt. 16:18-19]. ... Upon you, he says, I will build my Church; and I will give to you the keys, not to the Church; and whatever you shall have bound or you shall have loosed, not what they shall have bound or they shall have loosed (Modesty 21:9-10 [A.D. 220]).
Letter of Clement to James
Be it known to you, my lord, that Simon [Peter], who, for the sake of the true faith, and the most sure foundation of his doctrine, was set apart to be the foundation of the Church, and for this end was by Jesus himself, with his truthful mouth, named Peter, the first-fruits of our Lord, the first of the apostles; to whom first the Father revealed the Son; whom the Christ, with good reason, blessed; the called, and elect (Letter of Clement to James 2 [A.D, 221]).
Origen
And Peter, on whom the Church of Christ is built, against which the gates of hell shall not prevail left only one epistle of acknowledged genuineness (Commentaries on John 5:3 [A.D. 226-232]).
Cyprian
With a false bishop appointed for themselves by heretics, they dare even to set sail and carry letters from schismatics and blasphemers to the Chair of Peter and to the principal church [at Rome], in which sacerdotal unity has its source" (Epistle to Cornelius [Bishop of Rome] 59:14 [A.D. 252]).
Constantine Augustus
and that the opposing parties who were contending persistently and incessantly with each other, should be summoned from Africa; that in their presence, and in the presence of the bishop of Rome, the matter which appeared to be causing the disturbance might be examined and decided with all care (To Chrestus [A.D. 314] as recorded by Eusebius).
Cyril of Jerusalem
In the power of the same Holy Spirit, Peter, both the chief of the apostles and the keeper of the keys of the kingdom of heaven, in the name of Christ healed Aeneas the paralytic at Lydda, which is now called Diospolis [Acts 9 ;3 2-3 4] (Catechetical Lectures 17;27 [A.D. 350]).
Optatus
In the city of Rome the Episcopal chair was given first to Peter, the chair in which Peter sat, the same who was head - that is why he is also called Cephas - of all the apostles, the one chair in which unity is maintained by all. Neither do the apostles proceed individually on their own, and anyone who would [presume to] set up another chair in opposition to that single chair would, by that very fact, be a schismatic and a sinner. . . . Recall, then, the origins of your chair, those of you who wish to claim for yourselves the title of holy Church" (The Schism of the Donatists 2:2 [circa A.D. 367]).
Ephraim
Simon, my follower, I have made you the foundation of the holy Church. I betimes called you Peter, because you will support all its tall buildings. You are the inspector of those who will build on earth a Church for Me. If they should wish to build what is false, you, the foundation, will condemn them. You are the head of the fountain from which my teaching flows, you are the chief of my disciples. Through you I will give drink to all peoples (Homilies 4:1 [inter A.D. 338-373]).
Ambrose of Milan
[Christ] made answer: “You are Peter, and upon this rock will I build my Church . . .” Could he not, then, strengthen the faith of the man to whom, acting on his own authority, he gave the kingdom, whom he called the rock, thereby declaring him to be the foundation of the Church [Matt. 16:18]? (The Faith 4:5 [A.D. 379]).
Tyrannius Rufinus
and further how he speaks of the city of Rome, which now through the grace of God is reckoned by Christians as their capital (Apology 2:23 [A.D. 400])
Augustine
Among these [apostles] Peter alone almost everywhere deserved to represent the whole Church. Because of that representation of the Church, which only he bore, he deserved to hear “I will give to you the keys of the kingdom of heaven" (Sermons 295:2 [A.D. 411]).
I never made the Petros vs. Petra argument.
Well put brother! What the early Church father wrote is crystal clear... A Protestants job is to protest (it's in there title) and also to muddy up the waters but if you truly know and understand the history of Christianity, there's absolutely no doubt that you'll be a Catholic.
@@DrJordanBCooper let's forget about Matthew 16:18 for a second. How do you respond to Luke 22:32. Jesus says to Peter specifically the following even though the rest of the apostles are present...
"But I have prayed for you, Simon, that your faith may not fail. And when you have turned back, strengthen your brothers."
How would you explain John 21:17.... "The third time he said to him, "Simon son of John, do you love me?" Peter was hurt because Jesus asked him the third time, "Do you love me?" He said, "Lord, you know all things; you know that I love you." Jesus said, "Feed my sheep."
You see brother, it's not just about that single chapter & verse in Matthew 16:18 that Catholics see the authority of Peter. Its also all over holy scripture and all over the writings of the early Church fathers as well.
Jordan Cooper at 2:38 in the video. sorry brother but when you define or imply “rock” as having two different intended meanings in the passage its a “petros v petra” argument. Kephas is Kephas. The early Syriac version of Matthew while admittedly not Aramaic, makes no distinction. Otherwise your interpretation must in insist that Our Lord was speaking, went into a non sequitur for half a second, and then switched back to talking about Peter to Peter again.
15 He *said to them, “But who do you say that I am?” 16 Simon Peter answered, “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.” 17 And Jesus said to him, “Blessed are you, Simon Barjona, because flesh and blood did not reveal this to you, but My Father who is in heaven. 18 I also say to you that you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build My church; and the gates of Hades will not overpower it. 19 I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; and whatever you bind on earth shall have been bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall have been loosed in heaven.”
That confession of faith and distinction of who Jesus truly is indeed is the theological rock and foundation of understanding the faith. But how can we reasonably ignore the implication of the entire passage when Jesus:
1. Changes the name of Simon; theologically significant feature in the. Bible (Abram, Abraham, Jacob, Israel) because its a Blessing and a covenant.
2. Declares that He’s building an eternal Church. Not a temple, not a shrine but a Church that belongs solely to the Son of God.
3. Declares that He will give Peter and only Peter in the presence of all the other Apostles, keys with power to bind and loose.
So then what are those keys? What is that power to bind? And what happened to that gift once Peter died?
if peter was not foundation of the early church then i guess lutheranism shouldn't even exist, because luthernism takes the whole teaching of the RC and put it into his own context, somehwere Martin Luther is more comfortable with.
Catholicism doesn't teach that Christ's sacrifice is an appeasement against the wrath of God the Father. That theology is Calvinism.
.. That theology is not limited to Calvinism.
Barb Wellman yeah Calvinism 1500 years later if your claiming that is truth then your claiming Jesus was a terrible teacher left everyone in Limbo until they reformation and later John Calvin such garbage it’s laughable...
.. John, Let us be more charitable here. Much of these disagreements stem from each side defining certain terms differently. Also, I think that we can agree that Jesus was NOT "a terrible teacher..", the phrase you wrote above, here. You don't believe that, either.... but it would be better not to even write such, even to try to make a point... because it's too "flippant". Agree?
34Packardphaeton no it’s truth I know Jesus is the greatest teacher ever and the quotes and writings prove that the problem is you want to come in 1500 years later and claim its truth but that is ridiculous but let’s talk about the founder of the reformation Martin Luther here is some quotes he said www.davidlgray.info/2013/09/11/500-years-of-protestantism-the-33-most-ridiculous-things-martin-luther-ever-wrote/. Is that a guy to follow I mean he inspired Hitler hey but then again that goes with coming in 1500 years later and putting aside Jesus Christ Church and his teachings and sacraments...
False, the sacrificial nature of the mass is a re sacrifice of Christ, the host. The substitutionary sacrifice of Christ is performed over and over by Catholics for grace. Calvin and Anselm both beleived in substitionary atonement.
Well reasoned and communicated. THANKS
Paul: Abraham was justified for his faith, not his circumcision.
James: Because Abraham had faith, he got circumcised as the LORD commanded him.
My two cents, it is Christ who justifies us before God and our charitable works that justifies us before men.
To the apostles and Jesus, 'Faith' entailed 'Obedience' (or faithfulness). Neither Paul nor James said what you claimed.
@@tysonguess
Yes they did. Not word for word but the same concept.
Yunus Ahmed The problem with “sola fide” is that it’s no where in the Bible and no where taught in the early church.
The only place in the Bible where faith alone is it says you’re saved “not by faith alone”
Faith and works is what gets you saved. St. Paul says if you do anything without love it means nothing, Jesus says to receive his body and blood or else you have no life within you. These are things we’re suppose to do with our faith.
@@nicholassellers6249
What about Romans 4 and the entire book of Galatians?
And Ephesians 2:8-9?
The Bible states multiple times works fo not save you and are not meritorious. That if we believe and Jesus and confess with our mouth that he is Lord then we are saved. No room for works in there.
And James says faith without works is dead because faith will logically produce works. Therefore faith alone saves but faith will never be alone.
Yunus Ahmed The Bible never says “Faith Alone” it says faith will save but not faith alone.
What do you think about Jesus saying we much eat of his body and drink of his blood to have life within us? Or Paul saying you must have love?
Catholics believe we do not receive grace through our works but only through the grace of God. Our faith will produce good works but if we have no love our faith means nothing.
Most importantly though, you must eat the flesh and drink the blood of our savior. He stresses it so deeply and it’s one of the most beautiful things about the Catholic Church. To be able to receive Jesus, life itself. He says at the last supper “do this in remembrance of me” but Protestants don’t do it nearly enough.
Very good video. I Broadly agree with all the points you make. Thank you.
St. John Henry Newman • pray for us
St Josephine Bakhita • pray for us
St Miguel Pro • pray for us
St Pius V • pray for us.
Sancti Pius X, ORA PRO NOBIS! ✝️
Timothy Freeman Giuseppe Sarto
@FaithHopeGrace
Are they dead or are they alive in Christ and in heaven? Serious question. I don't believe saints are omnipresent though, so I don't pray to them
Him Bike;
John 17 says Jesus prays for us.
@FaithHopeGrace
If they're not omniscient, how can saints in heaven hear prayers from us here?
I'm really close to leaving Geneva and traveling over to Wittenberg, dear brother. Do you have any other Lutheran channels to check out that you would endorse?
Check out Ask the Pastor with Pr Sullivan in Kerville TX. Also, Pr Wolfmueller has a lot of videos too...he's a pastor in Austin. We'd love to have you here in Wittenberg (or perhaps I should say Augsburg)! I made that same move myself.
@@lukemwills I LOVE pastor Sullivan
@@Aaryq Me too. I'm planning to visit Holy Cross in Kerrville one of these Sundays...it's about 2 hours away from me.
No dont leave us in Geneva
@@conservativecalvinist3308 I ended up keeping a foot in Geneva and a foot in Canterbury with Dr. Packer.
Justification by Faith is a legitimate foundational doctrine, as long as it is not used as a cover for unrighteous practice for that would contradict Paul who firmly warned that no one who does will inherit the kingdom of God.
It is legit doctrine because that is what scripture says plainly. Hypocrisy is a common human trait. That is one of the reasons we need faith in the first place. So, even though I understand your point I think I'll stick with the Bible and just believe that the faith placed inside me by the Gospel is sufficient to justify me before God through Christ alone. It is enough and is available to save.
Luther said that we are justified by faith alone, but true faith, the faith which justifies, changes us such that we have a desire to pursue righteousness, not that anyone is ever close to achieving perfect righteousness in this life, but true faith leads to a life of repentance, true sorrow for our sins and a desire to do better, rather than an attitude of now that I have been justified by faith I am free to pursue a life of sin.
Wrong wrong and wrong...explain then James 2:24 “do you see that a men is justified by means of works AND NOT BY FAITH ALONE?
read it again “not by faith alone”......
So how can justification by faith alone can be a legitimate doctrine?
It is incredible how you are not being told the truth on you church........
St Peter in Galatians 2:16 refers to the works of the Jewish law.......that was the problem with Martin Luther.....he interpreted the bible on his own and his teaching are still causing “intellectuals” to called justification by faith a “legitimate doctrine”
I initially thought that when works was mentioned that it referred to feeding the poor, preach the bible and help convert people to Christianity, do good deeds to help fellow man but instead works its just traditional repetitive sayings/prays/acts. If Roman Catholics were about works, why are they one of the wealthiest organisations in the world. Shouldn't this wealth go towards helping the poor, the starving, the handicapped. They could probably end world poverty with their wealth. I think the same way about other religions that have extreme wealth. I don't get it. What's the verse about a camel passing through the eye of a needle🤔
@@dansmith9724 the poor will always be here.....it is biblical.....In Matthew 26:11 the disciples got mad becauseMary Magdalene used her expensive perfume to clean Jesus’s foot and they were saying exactly the same thing you are saying (why using this expensive perfume on him, they said: they should give it to the poor) Jesus said to them “why are you bothering this woman??The poor you will always have with you”
See, what you just said…. It is biblical already…. So don’t get too concern
Do you go into the Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification anywhere, by any chance? I thought it was agreed that Lutherans and Catholics agree on justification from this, but I know nothing of the details or if it holds to all Lutheran groups.
Good video btw.
It only applies to the most theologically liberal sects.
Dr. Cooper,
I’m RC and you seem like a fair person so I have a question for you. Regarding your concern about the RC view on Justification, how do you feel about the statements by RC in the Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification? For example the JDDJ says “works follow justification and are its fruits”. It says “whatever in the justified precedes or follows the free gift of faith is neither the basis of justification nor merits it.” Regarding assurance of salvation, it says in spite of our human weaknesses, we can trust Gods promises so “the believer may yet be certain that God intends his salvation”. What are your thoughts on these statements? Thanks so much, Jim
You failed to discuss the giving of the keys and the binding and loosening to Simon specifically in Matthew 16:
"17 And Jesus answered him, “Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jona!
For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father who is in heaven.
18 And I tell you, you are Peter,[d] and on this rock[e] I will build my church, and the powers of death[f] shall not prevail against it.[g]
19 I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven,[h]and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.” "
@Asaph Vapor lol. Not quite, buddy. Nice try, though.
Jesus was obviously appointing Peter to be the prince of the apostles, an apostle who had pre-eminent authority over the other apostles. And we see in the book of Acts that it was Peter who was in charge, making decisions, calling meetings, presiding over those meetings, etc.
I’m a Catholic searching for truth and found this very helpful. I think my beliefs are more Lutheran than Catholic. Praying I will continue grow in my faith. Thank you for these videos!
How’s life?
Christ’s peace to you.
Did you start making a transition away from Catholicism, and was it for similar reasons? I find the praying to Mary and the saints some of the most problematic parts for me. That and purgatory.
Lutherans say they are the "Evangelical Catholic Church" and the reformed western Catholic Church. Basically, they keep all the R Catholic practices that don't contradict scripture, and discard those that do. I'm not Lutheran, but I'm looking into it because I'm thinking of switching. That's what they have told me.
1222
The beauty of man, created in the Living Image of God, is indescribable
Wednesday, September 24th, 2014 @ 15:05
My dearly beloved daughter, just as My Beloved Mother was chosen by God to herald the Coming of the Messiah so, too, is she being called to prepare humanity for My Second Coming.
She has been elevated into the highest Hierarchy in Heaven and has been accorded great powers by My Eternal Father. Nevertheless, she remains as was then, and as is now, and always will be, a devoted and humble servant of God. She serves Him in His Plan to raise man to the perfect state in which he was meant to be.
The beauty of man, created in the Living Image of God, is indescribable. No man, woman or child on this earth can match that, which was created when God brought forth Adam and Eve. Sin was their downfall and Lucifer their enemy. Then, this perfect state was destroyed. Stained by sin, man will never regain this perfect state again until the serpent, and all those who worship him are banished. Until that day comes, the beauty of the human body and soul will remain tarnished.
Man is God’s greatest love. The angels are His servants in that they, too, must show love for God’s Creatures. God’s Love for His family supersedes all that He created and, until He regains the souls of His children, He will never rest. God permits many sufferings, humiliations and tragedies, all of which are caused by the hatred of the one whom He held in the highest regard - the former Archangel Lucifier, who became Satan. Fallen because of his jealousy, pride and self-love, he caused My Father the greatest pain imaginable. And today, just as it was then, he still does the same.
My Father’s loyal angels, all the saints and My beloved Mother, have formed a bond, which can never be broken. Whatever My Father dictates is carried out by His Elite Hierarchy. He is never questioned. Whatever My Father desires, is the correct way and the most powerful way. It is the way in which the human race can be saved from the curse of the evil one. That is His prerogative. No one would ever dare to question Him. In His Final Plan, the final stage in which He will bring His Plan of Salvation to an end, He will intervene in many ways.
My Mother’s title, ‘The Mother of Salvation’, the final one given to her by the Eternal Father, God the Most High, is no accident. She was sent to warn the world and prepare it for the final onslaught against the human race by the evil one. She has been accorded this task and I ask that you accept this, and respond to her call for prayer at all times.
The Holy Trinity will bring about many Blessings to those who respond to this, the final mission, from Heaven - the Mission of Salvation. Accept, with thanks that such favour has been shown to humanity with love and graciousness of heart.
Your Beloved Jesus
"Works Righteousness"
(Pelagianism) was declared a heresy in the Catholic Church in 418 AD at the Council of Carthage.
@Asaph Vapor umm...not so, actually.
@Asaph Vapor No, Catholics don't believe in a works based salvation. Common error amongst you Protestants though. Catholics believe in Ephesians 2:8-10.
Asaph Vapor The Rosary is a powerful tool against the Devil
@David Ortiz which church?
Who is a follower of heresy to claim something about the early church?
@Asaph Vapor wrong. Done write ignorance ..It's faith which brings Grace and leads to works.
Thank you! Great video 😊
I’m glad you made this video. I’m hoping “Five Reasons I am not Eastern Orthodox” is next.
The doctrine of justification is the main reason not to be Eastern Orthodox.
YES! PLEASE!
I'm a former eastern orthodox and I really need help!
Ryan Dacoregio What are you now, a Lutheran?
@@thenopasslook Yes! I'm attending a Lutheran church. It's been great, but my Eastern Orthodox friends have not made things easier for me ... I had to stop talking to them, at least temporarily, to devote myself to trying to understand what's happening to me.
Ryan Dacoregio What are they saying to you?
OK for your own sakes, I'm growing weary of hearing criticisms of Catholic orthodoxy as not reflective of the Early Church practices, when Eastern and Oriental Orthodox perspectives are shared, and often identical. In the case of Oriental Orthodoxy, this reflects stongly a shared history of practice and ideology that spans the first 400 years of Christianity (pre-Chalcedon 451AD) !
The questions I've had about the Sacrifice of the Mass has to do with forgiveness of sin. Does the sacrifice have to be represented to forgive sin, and do Roman Catholics need to participate in the Mass to be forgiven (I think mainly venial sins)? I know there is auricular and personal confession, but are they complete without participating in the Mass?
That Feeling When you are trying to shed light on a theological position but the sun suddenly starts to shed light directly into your eyes. 😋
@David OrtizTelling him, his eyes tell that he lies, is insulting and disrespectful. Shame on you.
@@opfipip3711Um, no. Your incorrect rewording of it is disrespectful. Sayings like"your eyes can tell you lies", or "your eyes may deceive you," or "your eyes can play tricks on you," are very old. They simply mean that a person can be deceived. In which case, the fault is mostly in the one who deceives, and to a lesser extent in the one deceived (especially if the latter lacks the information or wisdom not to see the problems / faults in what is being told or shown them.
There is no Solar Scripta, try to be less sly next time.
I respect the way you're handling these topics. There's a journey before me that has left me without any denomination or labels, so it's been difficult to explain my faith to people. I'm thinking of saying that I'm Catholic, but not Roman Catholic. What are your thoughts?
Orthodox are also Catholics. The Eastern Orthodox Catholic Church is the official name. All the churches got together in the 381 Council of Constantinople and added to the Nicene Creed the 4 Marks of the Church. "One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic" Church. Lutheran's also recite this. "Roman" in the Roman Catholics is simply because Peter, traveled there, and stayed for a good period of time, along with Paul and spent their final days before being martyred. Rome has stood the test of time, unlike the older ancient Eastern Catholic cities that fell to Islam.
That is a misunderstanding. There only one type of catholic.
Roman catholic and catholic are the same...but now a days there are many individuals that are trying to call the “Roman catholics” and “catholics” two different groups. That is why you can not tell the difference (neither they can)
In every part of the world, catholic is a catholic.....period.....but in this effort to “intellectualize” faith, this type of people try to put a label on everything.
There is only one church that Jesus christ founded in 33 AD and that is the Roman Catholic and Apostolic church and still prevalent for 2000 plus year and you and I will be gone and the Roman Catholic and apostolic church will still be here for other 10,000 years
All you need is a relationship with the Savior, Jesus Christ, not religion. It's that simple!
Jordan Cooper you seem to forgot the verse which said our lord said "I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.” in the time of the kings of Israel, the king would appoint a man to serve as his chief steward, who is literally given the keys of the kingdom, and can act in the name of the king if the king were absent. to the jews who would later become the first christians this was an obvious gesture that Christ gave St. Peter the authority as his vicar on earth, and furthermore in the years to follow, St. Peter is shown as a leader of the early Church, such as an instance on the day of Pentecost, when he adressed the people.
In concusion there are evidence of the institution of the papacy.
Peter was the leader of the apostles. How does that transitions into Papal infallibility? Why would they call councils in the book of acts and the early church if they thought Peter’s opinion was always right? Why not just ask him lol
@@elumayo4090 What is Papal infallibility and what does it entail?
Perhaps you could do a more in depth video on the inconsistencies. I, for one, am quite interested (and, perhaps, in need of personally reflecting on it).
Hi dr Cooper I’m new to your channel just curious what denomination are you?
Lutheran
*Hermas of Rome 80 AD*
“You will write two books, and you will send the one to Clements and the other two great. And Clements will send his to foreign countries, for permission has been granted to him to do so” The Shepherd 1:2:4
*St. Irenaeus of Lyons AD 189* "The blessed apostles, then having founded and built up the Church, committed into the hands of Linus the office of the episcopate" Against Heresies
*Eusebius of Ceserea AD 312* "Victor… was the 13th Bishop of Rome from Peter" Church history 5:28:3 They don't end...
He’s not saying that the Bishop of Rome didn’t exist, but rather it’s not the head of the church.
@@EpicWarTurtle
Then I'd point to Zelie's reference to Eusebius but go a bit further to Pope Victor's excommunication of Asian churches.
answeringislamblog.wordpress.com/2024/01/10/numbers-522-is-not-about-abortion/
The didn’t want the Pope so they created many smaller popes.
Thank you, very interesting!
Hey, God bless you all, I am trying to discern either to become Lutheran or Catholic, I wanted to know if you could recommend videos, documentaries and books about Luther. I have a course about Luther, but is from a very critic Catholic priest, so I wanted to watch that after reading good and neutral things about Luther.
Think for yourself and ask God yourself with real intent which church to join. Still have whatever respect you can for other different believers that likely have a similar story of finding the one real truth. I'm positive various people of various faiths will say they found the "real" God. Yet, all of many different beliefs. I still doubt the answer is for all of us to fight, shun, and disrespect each other till we're all dead or one left standing.
@@bobbq8380 Hey brother, I believe Jesus is the only way, you know it was a beautiful and difficult time, I was left with just God, no assurance from men, just from the Word of God and Holy Spirit guiding me. God lead me to another level of life with Him months after. Now I feel more close to God. It was a hard moment, struggling with faith. Listen the music from Norton Hall Band He will Hold me fast
Lutheran follows a "faith alone" doctrine.
Guys speak truth in love. Some ppl I see here seem glad the others are wrong and want to bash them instead of persuade them to come to what they think is the truth.
Truth and grace go together. Stop trolling we cant even have conversations without politeness. Neither compromise nor insult. Grow up
Do the math : One(Jesus is the Way, the Truth, and the Life) = One Jesus, One Way, One Truth and One Life
Breakdown: One Savior, One Church, One Bread of Life with One Cup of Salvation
Those who believe in Him believes what He says: Take this and eat it, for it is My Body, which will be give up for the forgiveness of sins.
Take this cup and drink for it is My Blood, the blood of the new and everlasting covenant, the cup of Salvation. If you refuse to eat and drink then you refuse His gift of salvation.
u did the wrong math, there is one, one jesus that is the way, the truth, and the life. He is all those, he is one. there is not 1 of each
@@Theaddekalk There is one way to heaven.
There is one Truth.
There is one Life.
Yes they are one that's called the Holy Trinity. We can talk about one at a time.
.. Romans 10:17 .. "Faith comes by hearing, and hearing by the Word of God."
@@34Packardphaeton Hearing=Listening=Obedience as in Simon Cephas translates to Obedient Rock. The new leader of the 12 Tribes of Israel. He was taught by Jesus what to teach others, that is why one needs to listen to the teachings of the Catholic Church. Don't forget that St Paul was an Apostle of the Catholic Church who taught the same message as the First Pope. Thank you.
... The original church of the Gospel of Jesus Christ.. eventually strayed from the true and genuine Gospel. The Roman Catholic church is not infallible; neither are they the same church today as the original church began by Christ with his apostles. Faith and salvation comes to individuals via the Holy Spirit --- it does not come via any church, least of all the church of Rome. Thank you.
Already Vincent of Lerins in fifth century taught development of Doctrine. Where does Trent say, that there haven't been development?
Vatican 1
This was great
Definitely agree with you on the papacy, the saints and justification. Great stuff
I'm praying for you that you continue to your studies...the more you study the sooner you'll see the Truth.
I for one am living a Catholic Life and won't trade it for the World.
Robert Sparkes, dont trade it for the world, trade it for the truth about God. I know you sincerely believe it is true, I too have been there, but I suggest you study the bible, learn church history, ask God to reveal truth. I recommend Fred Tarsitano especially his 9 part series on the original of the RCC. Blessings.
Could you show me some (3 or more) examples of early church interpretations of Matthew 16? Some big names, preferably.
Hi, some catholics say that a valid sacrament always requires the participation of a catholic priest. What can we answer? Thanks, It's a huge question for me.
That is wrong...Anyone can legitimately baptize, as long as the correct form is used. And the intention is right. Even sn atheist can do it...As long as form, matter, snd intention are correct.
@nizbitcrit Thanks
@@daviribeiro3032 sandy grogg you are partially right....the baptism can only be done in case of imminent death Anyone baptized can do the baptism
In the catholic church only a priest can give a valid sacrament (baptism, confirmation, priesthood, Matrimony , confessions, eucharist, anointing of the sick)
Other protestant groups pastor bob can do as he pleases but not in the catholic church.
I don't know. Why believe the early synods (e.g. the divinty of Jesus, the Nicene Creed, etc.) and the very body of scripture itself (selected from all the early writings) if not for a magisterium? And if this magisterium is not infallible (under guidance by the Spirit), might the Creed or scripture be wrong in some places? If the Spirit was infallible in selecting scripture and writing it, and in generating the Creed and other teachings, why would the Spirit stop guiding the church at some arbitrary point?
Why did the spirit stop guiding most of the religious Jews of Jesus day? Their people followed God since Moses/Abraham. True faith was seemingly what they lacked though. True faith in Christ is what saves is it not? Not Apostolic succession, and not tradition? A successively linked religious hierarchy since the apostles doesn't save either. It is God who saves all in Christ. It is a gift we do not merit or attain by our ability, or our actions and activities.
Actions and activities are the outworking of faith, they do not cause salvation. To say your church group is the sole giver of salvation is to make yourself a kind of savior alongside God. But God has no need of people or any churches to help him save souls. He can as scripture says create Abraham's children from the rocks. Can he not make brothers and true believers in Christ the same way?
//Why believe the early synods (e.g. the divinty of Jesus, the Nicene Creed, etc.) and the very body of scripture itself (selected from all the early writings) if not for a magisterium?//
Jesus expected people to be aware of and believe and understand the OT Scriptures and there was no religious magisterium at the time. With your Catholic understanding, how is this even possible?
Why would the spirit say that there is one mediator in scripture, then contradict itself through the roman church, by making Mary another mediator? Christ undoubtedly is enough. Yet the Magisterium of Rome thought christians needed another mediator to get right with God
@@geoffrobinson
The "Magisterium" would have been local church leadership. The elders of the church. And once in awhile the bishops/elders would meet together for important issues.
That question also applies to the establishment of vatican 2
Thank you Dr Cooper. Your point about justification being vindication struck a chord.
Thank you, Jordan..
Im soo grateful that I can go straight to Our Lord Jesus Christ at anytime… ! And talk to him, Pray to him.and I have a deep Spiritual Relationship with him!
Not just during my pray/ Quiet Time!
I know Mary at Jesus’s Mother, a Precious lady, I have No need to worship or Pray to her!
#1 I hate authority (despite my bookshelf)
#2 Saints can’t help you no matter how hard they pray for you.
#3 John chapter 6 has no meaning.
#4 because
#5 drum roll…. the “dictionary”
we must also concern ourselves with many of our protestant churches that've become anything but biblical !
It’s not the loss of the catholic church if you don’t want to be a catholic. There are so many pastors, ministers, preachers from other denominations converted to catholicism and they are apologists of the catholic church.
Delusional
7:19, when the angel Gabriel greets Mary in Luke’s Gospel, Luke 1:28 he says - “Hail Mary full of grace, the Lord is with the.” “Blessed art thou amongst women and blessed is the fruit of thy womb..” Angel Gabriel acknowledges Mary as the mother of Jesus who was sent by the Heavenly Father. This is how we acknowledge Mary in the Catholic Church, just as Angel Gabriel did in the gospel. Mary is not equal to Jesus by any means but we acknowledge her importance as the mother of Jesus through the words in the gospel. Through the acknowledgement, we ask her to pray for us as she can bring us closer to our Father Jesus. Hope this clears your perspective on the Universal Catholic Church & God Bless.
According to catholic lore, Mary has a throne next to gods throne. Why does she have to pray to him when shes sitting rite next to him?
thomas hess
As Christians, we ask Mary to pray for us because we understand she is in heaven with our Lord.
Now why pray to Mary in the first place? Because Jesus has given us his Blessed Mother as our great spiritual mother (Rev.12:17), a heavenly advocate who intercedes for us.
Some Christians will ask, “Why pray to Mary when we can go directly to Jesus?” And yet they have no problem asking others here on earth to pray for them, instead of simply and solely praying to Jesus on their own. Indeed, St. Paul says that God grants blessings “in answer to many prayers” (2 Cor. 1:11). And if the prayer of a righteous man on earth avails much with God (Jas. 5:16-18), how much more would prayers from one who has finished the race and now reigns with Christ in heaven?
Given their heavenly perfection in Jesus, which would include perfection in charity and thus concern for their brothers and sisters in Christ on earth (see 1 Cor. 2:12-26), we should not be surprised that Scripture presents these holy men and women of heaven bringing our prayers to Jesus the Lamb (Rev. 5:8), and that from the early Church onward Christians have asked the intercession of the saints who have gone before them to heaven.
In this light, we see that the saints-as faithful disciples of Jesus-are his collaborators, not his competitors in interceding for us. Consequently, because Mary is the Mother of God and the disciple par excellence (see Luke 1:28, 38), we should not be surprised that she is our preeminent intercessor among the angels and saints.
@@SuperrBoyful Hi, you make it seem so logical.
Appreciate your clear reasoning why you believe as you do.
As a Catholic my mind was thinking what would be my response to each as you spoke, which reaffirmed my love of having Church Fathers over 2000 years addressing each.
Again enjoyed the way you presented your views!!
I think a far more compelling argument for the papacy is the fact that Jesus gives Peter the keys to the kingdom. In the Jewish kingdom, there was a man called the vicar to the king who literally carried around a massive set of keys. He was the man who spoke on the King’s behalf when he was gone. Jesus was assigning Peter that role.
In the book of Acts, the person who spoke for Christ and led the saints was the Holy Spirit.
@@jeromepopiel388 You know Peter called the shots, right?
Timothy Freeman He gave the keys to all the apostles, peter was a leader of the apostles and is the first among equals, but there’s no reason to believe that peter and his successors were able to speak truth infallibility from either scripture or early church tradition.
Timothy Freeman,I understand the Catholic reasoning for this. If Peter is now the new replacement for Jesus Christ and the HS and possibly Peter went to Rome, then the Bishop of Rome can day "I am the Holy One. You must all look to Me. I am the one bridge (holy pontiff) and there is no other" But fortunately St. Peter did write letters to the church and in I Pt. Ch. 5 v1 Peter clearly says he is an elder the same as the elders he writes to, not an elder of elders as some claim. All I need to do is read it. Plain and simple.
@@elumayo4090 "Whatever you bind on Earth shall be bound in Heaven, and whatever you loose on Earth shall be loosed in Heaven."
In that text Jesus says
“You” 7 times.
You is second person singular.
7 is the perfect number that points to God.
@Asaph Vapor So you admit the Vatican is the Temple?
Asaph Vapor 1 Cor 6:19
Do u not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit
well , I have a question for you. where is the bible came from? and , where the apostles burried? In the roman catholic right.
The bible was not written by the Roman religion. Let's pretend they did, then why the Roman church's 95% of doctrines and dogmas are unbiblical?
@@derekl4619 whether you like it or not or against what your pastor had told you....sorry to burst you bubble but i have to inform you that the bible was selected, approved, written by the christian catholics......year 317-330 ad....
Waaaay before you pastor and his church and Martin Luther even existed
Truth huts man, truth hurts...
Have you seen the “joint declaration on the doctrine of justification” by the Lutheran World Federation & Catholic Church?
Glad you transitioned to the Lutheran tradition!
David Ortiz
Yes, because saying a couple Hail Marys to have God forgive you your sins is definitely a Tradition from God.
Jesus told Simon, his name now would be Petra or rock and upon this rock He would build His Church... and He(Jesus) would give Peter the Keys to His Kingdom. In those days when you gave some one keys to your house or property, you were making them overseer over your house/Kingdom.
He gave the same keys to all the Apostles later. Jesus, Paul, and Andrew founded the Eastern Orthodox Church. Jesus, Stephen, the eunuch, and Mark founded the Oriental Orthodox Church. Jesus, Thaddeus, Bartholomew and Thomas founded the Church of the East. Each one claims to be the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church. These claims are as legitimate as yours.
Jesus also called Simon "Satan" shortly after calling him Petros. But Jesus never called the petra "Satan."
@@Mygoalwogel Who is Petra? And the eastern orthodox and Oriental orthodox were united with Rome at First. Where does Jesus give the keys to the other Apostels?
Όχι. Ο Πέτρος είναι ο Πέτρος και όχι η πέτρα. Η πέτρα είναι στο θηλυκό και η εκκλησία είναι επίσης στο θηλυκό και στον ενικό. Αυτό σημαίνει ότι ο Πέτρος σίγουρα δεν είναι η πέτρα πάνω στην οποία έχτισε ο Ιησούς την εκκλησία του
@@Mygoalwogelthat is so wrong.
1 by “initiating” the orthodox churches does not mean that Jesus gave them the keys of heaven.
You have to understand that Jesus refers to heaven being where he returned, where he claimed to be coming from. He once said “my kingdom is not from this world”....so how Jesus gave the keys to found his kingdom on this world?.....
You are so lost....unbelievable
Jesus calls Peter “satan “.......yes I agree.....how many times have you though like Peter in your life?....Jesus in Matthew 16:-23 says “you are a stumbling block to me.....how many times have you be a stumbling block for someone?
I will tell you myself.....many times.....and that means (according to Jesus) I have though like Satan....correct.... do you understand?...and I will tell you more about St Peter
1 he cut the ear of the high priest servant
2 he had a weak faith (he doubted when he was walking with Jesus in the water)
3 he denied Jesus not 1 not 2 but 3 times
4 he did not want jesus to wash his foot
And guess what......
1he was the only one that identified Jesus to be the son of god
2 Jesus gave them the keys of heaven to ONLY HIM
3 Jesus told him three times if he loved him and Jesus told him”feed my lambs”
That guy my friend with all the human weaknesses and attributes and defects, is what is called the pope
I think you are perfect to be saying things like “well he call him satan”....... get the full story and dont take things out of context
@@Mario-fs4ru The thing that refutes the popes is not their human defects but their contradiction of the truth.
Lateran Council 1 Canon 21: We absolutely forbid priests, deacons, subdeacons, and monks to have concubines or to contract marriage.
Lateran Council 2 Canon 6: For since they should be and be called the temple of God, the vessel of the Lord, the abode of the Holy Spirit, it is *unbecoming* that they *indulge in marriage* and in *impurities.*
1 Timothy 4:1-3 Now the Spirit expressly says that in later times some will depart from the faith by devoting themselves to deceitful spirits and *teachings of demons,* through the insincerity of liars whose consciences are seared, who *forbid marriage*
1 Corinthians 9:5 *Do we not have the right* to take along a believing wife, as do the other apostles and the brothers of the Lord and Cephas?
Canon 21 continued: We decree in accordance with the definitions of the sacred canons, that *marriages already contracted by such persons must be dissolved,* and that the persons be condemned to do penance.
Matthew 19:6 So they are no longer two but one flesh. What therefore God has joined together, let not man separate.
Innocent III, 1204 "We destine specially to this, that the material sword may be sanctioned to supply the defect of the spiritual sword, and you, besides the temporal glory which you will attain from so pious and praiseworthy a work, may obtain that pardon for sins, which we grant
as an indulgence for the remission of their sins, since we want those who faithfully shall have laboured against the heretics to rejoice in the same indulgence as we grant as an indulgence for those crossing the sea for the aid of the Holy Land."
Lateran Council 4 Canon 3: Secular authorities, whatever office they may hold, shall be admonished and induced and if necessary compelled by ecclesiastical censure, that as they wish to be esteemed and numbered among the faithful, so for the defense of the faith they ought publicly to take an oath that they will strive in good faith and *to the best of their ability to exterminate* (pro viribus exterminare studebunt) in the territories subject to their jurisdiction all heretics pointed out by the Church.
_Ad extirpanda_ of Pope Innocent IV: We decree that the head of state [...] shall observe, both what is written herein, and other regulations and laws both ecclesiastical and civil, that are published against heretical wickedness. [...] No heretical man or woman may dwell, sojourn, or maintain a bare subsistence in the country, or any kind of jurisdiction or district belonging to it, whoever shall find the heretical man or woman shall boldly seize, with impunity, all his or their goods, and freely carry them off. [...] The head of state, or whatever ruler stands foremost in the public esteem, must cause the heretics who have been arrested in this manner to be taken to whatever jurisdiction the Diocesan, or his surrogate, is in, or whatever district, or city, or place the Diocesan bishop wishes to take them to. [...] *The head of state or ruler **_must force_** all the heretics whom he has in custody, provided he does so without killing them or breaking their arms or legs* to confess their errors and accuse other heretics whom they know.
Jesus gave the binding and loosing keys to all the Apostles in Matt 18:18.
1. In passage the word from Peter is Petros, the word for Rock is Petra. A difference
2. Peter, in his epistle, explains this comment. He tells us that Christ is the Rock, the chief cornerstone. We are living stones, part of the temple. That's in chapter 2 of 1 Peter 2:4-8
Ναι!! Είναι η αλήθεια!!!
I’m on the fence about Catholicism, I am thinking of becoming Lutheran (from a nondenominational background) for many of the same reasons you’ve described…I wonder about the various miracles that have happened (Marian, Eucharistic, Stigmata, incorruptibility, etc…) in the Catholic Church. How do we explain these? Even if you’re skeptical about many of them, there are quite a few that are inexplicable. I’m just wondering what your take on this is? I’m only interested in our host’s opinion so please try to resist from responding to this if you’re not him.
I would like to see his answer, too, if he responds.
This is his response. ua-cam.com/video/p-plm6mdkMM/v-deo.html
I would also add something he doesn't say; namely, other Protestant denominations such as Pentecostal have many miracles, healings, deliverances, etc., too. Some have said the Marian apparitions 'could be' advanced technology, and it's possible it existed back then at the time of Fatima because there was even more advanced technology in certain past times than we have today.
@@doriesse824 me too
Scott Hahn...if you go through his books/works...has gone through All of this quite a bit more thoroughly I would say...comes out for Catholicism in a very convincing/beautiful way..No approach is beyond reproach or perfect but I'll stick with my Catholic faith..Tks.anyhow. God bless.
Why did the POPE and bishops pay homage to a Mayan goddess at OCTOBER AMAZON SYNOD 2019? A BOWL dedicated to idol worzhip was on altar @st Peter basilica during Mass.
Scott Hahn supports the RC version of the Catholic faith....a bit different from eastern Orthodox church.
@@michaelciccone2194 This was outright heretical...Not to mention a total embarrassment. It was at this point that I began to consider leaving yfrcCstholic Church.Francis’ s obvious support for Biden...and his connection to China has befn disheartening, to say the least.
Honestly? I've always found his books to be theological light-weights. I read lots of theology books. Their depth and breadth are reflected in part by the index, and the number of pages.
Hahn writes skinny little hard backs,...AND AT THAT THEY ARE DOUBLE SPACED (or one-and-a-half spaced). Yeash! Talk about propheteering off of next to nothing! They are little more than a magazine article in hardback! ...My seminary papers had more substance to them than any one of his books!
There. I finally said it.
@@michaelciccone2194 Because he's very likely an "anti-pope."
This has been prophesied by many Catholic Saints and visionaries.
But it was Mary who brought me to Jesus (!!!), quite accidentally, without even being asked.
Katarzyna Czajkowska To Christ, through Mary. ❤️
Katarzyna Czajkowska My soul magnifies the Lord. ❤️
The Fullness of the Truth of Mary that we have today can only be found in the RCC.
This video might be too old for someone to see this comment. If you do, can you give me the cheat sheet version of how a Lutheran might see the communion of the saints, as mentioned in this video?
The Roman Catholic Church
1. The Church is one.
2. The Church is Visible
3. The Church is Forever
4. The Church is Truth
5. The Church is messy.
6. The Church is a Kingdom
7. The Church is teacher
8. The Church is mystery
9. The Church is hierarchal
10. The Church is Holy
11. The Church is Apostolic
12. The Church is sacramental
13. The Church is Catholic
14. The Church is dynastic
15. The Church is mother
16. The Church is real.
17. The Church is authoritative
18. The Church is the bride of Christ.
19 The Church is the mystical body of Christ.
20. The Church is unchangeable.
How do you say about this “So Jesus said to them, "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink His blood, you have no life in yourselves” ( John 6,53)
To play the devil's advocate here, Lutherans believe in the real presence of Christ in the Eucharist too.
In communion, Lutherans believe that it is the true body and blood of our Lord Jesus Christ under the bread and wine, for us as Christians to eat and to drink, instituted by Christ himself. See Matthew 26:26, 28.
@@al4381 : A question:
At a Lutheran service, how do the bread and wine become the Body and Blood of Jesus?
No answers to my question yet?
The response should be that no matter what Lutherans believe, (and these beliefs certainly do vary, as you know), during a Lutheran Service the bread and wine remain bread and wine.
The Lutheran minister is not in the line of Apostolic Succession.
@@alhilford2345 bingo
How do Lutherns not believe in Holy Synods when the Canon of Nicea explictly states it?
λόγος Απολογία exactly! I grew up Lutheran (now Roman Catholic) and I always wondered why we only believe in parts of different councils instead of the whole council. Protestantism/Lutheranism is quite silly when it come to Church history.
@@TheTrustingGamer Yeah, it reminds me of a St. Augustine quote.
"If you are picking from a source, you are not using the source, you are the source."
It's a logical inconsistency.
Also, I'm Eastern Orthodox. (P.s type Jay Dyer on youtube).
God Bless.
λόγος Απολογία that’s a good quote, and yeah I’ll search up Jay Dyer. I love Eastern Orthodoxy by the way, it’s the most beautiful liturgy in my opinion.
@@TheTrustingGamer Your learn alot about Orthodox Theology by Jay Dyer.
Respond back, when you have watched some of his theological talks. And thankyou for that compliment.
@@TheTrustingGamer I am a Ex Calvinist Protestant.
Hey, I hope you are well. Would you please turn on English subtitles so I can understand it because I am Deaf? Thank you
I didn't realize that they weren't on. I'll fix it.
If Chrism built His Church upon Peter, then Paul and all the other apostles wasted their time! May it never be!
Why does everyone go to the Catholic Church for exorcisms- at least the worst ones. A deamon will not leave the victim- until an Apostle- someone with apostolic authority- like the Bipshop over him gives authority
For possessions by lower or middle level demons prostents can get by many times, but if Santan has a lot invested in the victim- protestants can't get the job done.
The apostles couldn't remove some demons even using the Holy name and they asked Jesus
His reply was that some demons need to be prayed over. So that seems to back up what you say.
@@wolfthequarrelsome504 Matthew 17:18-20 is one time where the disciples couldn't drive out the demon. I think this is what you're referring to. I'm not entirely sure myself but my understanding was that they weren't strong enough in the faith to cast out the demon. It says that very clearly in Matthew 17:18-20 NIV (New International Version)
Papist exorcist can’t even exorcise their own institution of spirits of idolatry and child abuse in their own clergy.
Of course, when Jesus was speaking to Mathew about being the rock is was not talking no one else but those who would understand the meaning of it, and the Jews knew exactly what he meant referring to Isaiah 22:22. I always wonder why we now in the 21 century want to understand something that was said to a specific people who would understand it and not for us to try to give our 21 century interpretation! When we say let the Bible interprete itself on passages like Mathew 16, we jus fail to understand the time it was said on, to whom it was said and why it was said.
You know what we want, Dr. Jordan. An hour long Video of the Errors of the ELCA and the LWF. I'd blast through a $100 pay wall to see you do that.
On papacy how about the letter of St. clemens to corinth
Thank you for this short presentation which can not go in depth because of the time limit. Although I do not agree with everything you say I appreciate your honesty. What really is embarrassing are the personal attacks in the comments. Most of them are from Roman Catholics. This is a very bad testimony of ones own faith. These people behave as if they live in the 16th century and have to fight against Luther personally. At the moment I am very interested in the question of the credibility and the diversity between the "early fathers". I have found three points:
1. Paul warns us again and again that the church is threatened by wolves in sheep´s clothing etc. John is talking about the antichrists beginning to appear etc. The question that arises is why we can rely that "church fathers" and what they believed were not already corrupted to some extend at least.
2. When I listen to eastern orthodox theologians they cite "fathers" who differ from "catholic fathers". For example the question of how to understand the words of Jesus about Peter as rock was answered differently by "church fathers". Why should I follow one opinion and not another?
3. Jesus told us not to call anyone "father" but only the Father in Heaven. For me that is a clear warning to give any "spiritual leader" a spiritual authority to lead us as a father. Why did early Christianity very soon neglect this word of Christ? Yes, I see that Paul compares himself with a father. But maybe he did not know what Christ said in this regard. At least he did not ask believers to call him "father".
Could you answer these questions?
@@Mygoalwogel Thank you for your answer. But it did not meet the three points I was asking.
@@opfipip3711
1. Reliable or not, we read the sermons and Bible notes of the church fathers and later Bible readers to balance out our own 20-21st century biases. The earlier readers are not necessarily better than later.
2. One reason Lutherans don't present tradition as an equal authority to Scripture is because the church fathers are capable of error. Scripture isn't.
3. I don't know what you mean.
Because heretics never admit they are
Obviously I'm late to the party on this video, but I appreciate how clear you are on your positions.
I would have probably switched out the prayers to the saints with the doctrines concerning Mary, (since I think they are far more cut and dry when looking at scripture) but still a good run down.
He was describing the more idolatrous aspect. Some of that disturbs me, when it comes to praying, kneeling and bowing to statues of saints. Another part is the Catholic notion of communion of the saints. It's all to heaven and wanting saints to pray for you, because they are seen as more righteous. The saints referred to in the bible are us though, the church, the members of the church and we are to pray for and comfort one another. The living get left for the dead in CAtholic communion of the saints.
I have replied at length to the first "papacy" portion of this video:
"Reply to Jordan Cooper’s Rejection of the Papacy" [4-25-22]
It's posted on my blog, "Biblical Evidence for Catholicism."
Please do a video on the Deuterocanon/Apocrypha, or the seven books that are included in the Catholic Bible but not included in the Protestant Bible. I think that would be a very good and interesting video. Even as a Protestant, I myself believe that the Deuterocanonical books are divinely inspired by God and that they should be included in The Bible.
"You are the ROCK and upon this ROCK".. obviously Jesus is referring to Peter... the Apostles have indeed appointed bishops.. So many doubts in your case.. but yeah, I respect your opinion... But when you read early church Fathers like Tertullian, Clement of Alexandria, Origen among others, they have touched on the Primacy of Peter among the Apostles.. clearly he was the leader.. and of course, when he died, he must have a successor to lead the flock.. that is where the Popes come in..
@Asaph Vapor "Not Many agreed".. WOW!!! Really!!! Well, Read These:
Cyprian of Carthage
:
“The Lord says to Peter: ‘I say to you,’ he says, ‘that you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my Church.’ . . . On him [Peter] he builds the Church, and to him he gives the command to feed the sheep [John 21:17], and although he assigns a like power to all the apostles, yet he founded a single chair [cathedra], and he established by his own authority a source and an intrinsic reason for that unity. Indeed, the others were that also which Peter was [i.e., apostles], but a primacy is given to Peter, whereby it is made clear that there is but one Church and one chair. So too, all [the apostles] are shepherds, and the flock is shown to be one, fed by all the apostles in single-minded accord. If someone does not hold fast to this unity of Peter, can he imagine that he still holds the faith? If he [should] desert the chair of Peter upon whom the Church was built, can he still be confident that he is in the Church?” (The Unity of the Catholic Church 4; 1st edition [A.D. 251]).
Ephraim the Syrian
:
“[Jesus said:] Simon, my follower, I have made you the foundation of the holy Church. I betimes called you Peter, because you will support all its buildings. You are the inspector of those who will build on Earth a Church for me. If they should wish to build what is false, you, the foundation, will condemn them. You are the head of the fountain from which my teaching flows; you are the chief of my disciples. Through you I will give drink to all peoples. Yours is that life-giving sweetness which I dispense. I have chosen you to be, as it were, the firstborn in my institution so that, as the heir, you may be executor of my treasures. I have given you the keys of my kingdom. Behold, I have given you authority over all my treasures” (Homilies 4:1 [A.D. 351]).
Jerome
:
“‘But,’ you [Jovinian] will say, ‘it was on Peter that the Church was founded’ [Matt. 16:18]. Well . . . one among the twelve is chosen to be their head in order to remove any occasion for division” (Against Jovinian 1:26 [A.D. 393]).
The Letter of Clement to James
:
“Be it known to you, my lord, that Simon [Peter], who, for the sake of the true faith, and the most sure foundation of his doctrine, was set apart to be the foundation of the Church, and for this end was by Jesus himself, with his truthful mouth, named Peter, the first fruits of our Lord, the first of the apostles; to whom first the Father revealed the Son; whom the Christ, with good reason, blessed” (Letter of Clement to James 2 [A.D. 221]).
Origen
:
“[I]f we were to attend carefully to the Gospels, we should also find, in relation to those things which seem to be common to Peter . . . a great difference and a preeminence in the things [Jesus] said to Peter, compared with the second class [of apostles]. For it is no small difference that Peter received the keys not of one heaven but of more, and in order that whatsoever things he binds on earth may be bound not in one heaven but in them all, as compared with the many who bind on earth and loose on earth, so that these things are bound and loosed not in [all] the heavens, as in the case of Peter, but in one only; for they do not reach so high a stage with power as Peter to bind and loose in all the heavens” (Commentary on Matthew 13:31 [A.D. 248]).
Tertullian
:
“For though you think that heaven is still shut up, remember that the Lord left the keys of it to Peter here, and through him to the Church, which keys everyone will carry with him if he has been questioned and made a confession [of faith]” (Antidote Against the Scorpion 10 [A.D. 211]).
“[T]he Lord said to Peter, ‘On this rock I will build my Church, I have given you the keys of the kingdom of heaven [and] whatever you shall have bound or loosed on earth will be bound or loosed in heaven’ [Matt. 16:18-19]. . . . Upon you, he says, I will build my Church; and I will give to you the keys, not to the Church” (Modesty 21:9-10 [A.D. 220]).
Cyprian of Carthage
:
“The Lord says to Peter: ‘I say to you,’ he says, ‘that you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my Church, and the gates of hell will not overcome it. And to you I will give the keys of the kingdom of heaven . . . ’ [Matt. 16:18-19]. On him [Peter] he builds the Church, and to him he gives the command to feed the sheep [John 21:17], and although he assigns a like power to all the apostles, yet he founded a single chair [cathedra], and he established by his own authority a source and an intrinsic reason for that unity. Indeed, the others were that also which Peter was [i.e., apostles], but a primacy is given to Peter, whereby it is made clear that there is but one Church and one chair. . . . If someone does not hold fast to this unity of Peter, can he imagine that he still holds the faith? If he [should] desert the chair of Peter upon whom the Church was built, can he still be confident that he is in the Church?” (The Unity of the Catholic Church 4; 1st edition [A.D. 251]).
“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 has gathered elsewhere is scattering” (Letters 43[40]:5 [A.D. 253]).
“There [John 6:68-69] speaks Peter, upon whom the Church would be built, teaching in the name of the Church and showing that even if a stubborn and proud multitude withdraws because it does not wish to obey, yet the Church does not withdraw from Christ” (ibid., 66[69]:8).
Ephraim the Syrian
:
“[Jesus said:] ‘Simon, my follower, I have made you the foundation of the holy Church. I betimes called you Peter, because you will support all its buildings. You are the inspector of those who will build on earth a Church for me. If they should wish to build what is false, you, the foundation, will condemn them. You are the head of the fountain from which my teaching flows; you are the chief of my disciples’” (Homilies 4:1 [A.D. 351]).
Ambrose of Milan
:
“[Christ] made answer: ‘You are Peter, and upon this rock will I build my Church. . . . ’ Could he not, then, strengthen the faith of the man to whom, acting on his own authority, he gave the kingdom, whom he called the rock, thereby declaring him to be the foundation of the Church [Matt. 16:18]?” (The Faith 4:5 [A.D. 379]).
“It is to Peter that he says: ‘You are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my Church’ [Matt. 16:18]. Where Peter is, there is the Church. And where the Church is, no death is there, but life eternal” (Commentary on Twelve Psalms of David 40:30 [A.D. 389]).
To whom was Jesus referring five verses later, when He addresses Peter as "Satan"? Jesus was - obviously - referring not to Peter, who later denied Him three times, but what Peter said, in both verses.
Thank you! Informative and not abusive. Makes me proud to be a Lutheran. But I would probably have the Marian doctrines among the 5 instead of Sacrifice of the Mass. In spite of the errors I think there are many true Christians also among the Catholics. We are all coloured by our background and have white spots in our understanding. Still we can be God´s children.
MARIANNE HEDSTROM----Do you know that Luther had a very strong devotion to Mary ? Do you know that he took books out of the bible ? He wanted to remove "James" but cooler
heads restrained him ! Your bible is missing about seven books ! Do you read all these curses hurled at the Catholic church for having confession ? You have confession. Many Lutheran ministers and people are becoming Catholic by studying the early church teachings, believing their bibles and rejecting the hatred of the RCC. in Protestantism. The Holy Sacrifice of the
Mass is unchanged since 33AD. !
DAVID ORTIZ-----Anything our Saviour's church, that is guided by the Holy Spirit, does, must be discarded, according to A/VAPOR. HE promised to be with it for ever but it must not do anything, say anything or have Peter's successors say one word even though it is guided by the Holy Spirit. Have you heard the rumour that the Holy Spirit is guiding 30K to
40K bickering, disagreeing, bible-verse changing Protestant churches ? I am not sure about the 2.3 new Protestant churches that are springing up every day. [ Wikipedia ]
@Asaph Vapor I am talking about history. You are talking about what you want to believe. These pages are jammed with " it must be true, I want to believe it" !
@Asaph Vapor SEZ YOU !
@Asaph Vapor IT is AN HISTORICAL FACT, NOT AN OPINION, THAT LUTHER WANTED TO REMOVE "JAMES" FROM THE BIBLE. CHECK IT OUT ! He wanted tp remove it because
he did NOT agree with it ! ! ! [ stonehead ! ! ]
Im curious of what he thinks of Guadalupe ?
may i suggest that we all investigate christmas and easter while keeping our love for one another
..then, in the following verse, Jesus says to Peter "Get behind me Satan...)
then in the next v erse he says; I give you the keys of the Kingdom... (you must think you are very smart, don't you?)
@@silveriorebelo8045 Hes smart enough not to bow befor idols of wood and stone.
@@thomashess6211 you clearly have no idea what you’re talking about ...
@@3leon306 OK, ill change that to....hes stupid enough not to bow befor idols of wood and stone. There is that better?
@Chad _Monarch Are you sure? I thought Peter was made of wood. Live and learn i always say. Gosh, how did you get to be so smart?
Thank you, Pastor Jordan. Your video came at a very blessed time for me. I agree with all points. For me the two more aggregiously awful and unexplainable or debatable doctrines of Rome are the Marian doctrines and the doctrine of purgatory and the treasury of merit. While praying to the saints is, in and of itself, unbiblical in my mind, the extra step that Catholics take in adoring and trusting in Mary's mediation, instead of Christ's, is just abhorrent to me. And the idea that there is a purgatory in between this world and heaven, is again not only unscriptural, but it is just so cruel. To tell people that when they die Christ's work of justification is not enough for them to be with the Lord, and furthermore to tell their faithful that they must burden themselves with prayers for the dead to get them out of purgatory faster, and the giving of indulgences with the idea that the church has the powerr to spill over some merit onto their dead loved ones, or themselves, to get them to heaven faster, is just downright satanic in my view. Not to say that Catholics are Satanic- I know many Catholics who love Jesus fervently. I am just grieved that Rome has put these burdens and obstructions in their path to communion with Christ. And that is why, though I too grow weary of the divisions in protestantism and find some of the beauty and tradition and sacramental nature of the Roman church appealing, I could never be a Roman Catholic. Thank you again for your insightful video.
You do not understand Catholicism. What you find abhorrent is also abhorrent to me. We do not adore Mary and Jesus is our sole mediator, not Mary.
@FaithHopeGrace
You: Co-Redemptix- the 5Th Marian which means the salvation/mediator of souls, equal to the Lord,
Me: As usual, a Protestant sets up a straw man argument and then crushes it. Congratulations, you have won a fantasy argument. But you haven't laid a finger on what Catholics really believe. I too would condemn your straw man. Now, back to reality.
@FaithHopeGrace
I believe all that the Catholic Church teaches. Every Catholic would say the same or he would no longer be Catholic. Yes, it might become dogma. I hear about it far more from critical Protestants than I do from any Catholic source.
Life At Home:
Mediation and intercession are not the same thing.
My mother in law, in her last illness, was not looking forward to meeting her Redeemer. She was terrified of purgatory. Our pastor counseled her. She died a Lutheran.
Well, if we read that Jesus gave the keys to Peter to bind and loose, then we understand the papacy. It is very easy to understand, the thing is whether we are enough humble to accept it.
"I was the subject of a couple of podcasts recently, I haven't listened to them but..." 😂
This was a nice video, doing more like this is welcomed. I completely agree with you that the doctrine of justification is the main reason not to be Catholic. But I also think that your 4th reason is what underlines everything. The idea that theology can change and, in fact, can depart from what is taught in the Bible is for me the biggest fundamental issue with Catholicism.
@@wolfthequarrelsome504 vatican one vs vatican two
+Wanttoknowabout +Jordan Cooper -- *_"...the doctrine of justification is the main reason not to be Catholic."_* Yup! That's why I have not and never will re-embrace the spiritual tradition of my youth.
I would have preferred that Jordan tackled the doctrine of justification way in the beginning, but I have started to think that being the very last point made much more sense.
This might be neither here nor there but I will tack it on here if for no other reason than to show a few links I share on occasion elsewhere. I have done so over at the predominantly conservative social media platform *GAB* roughly two or three times within the past few weeks. I get along with most Roman Catholics; but I also rub shoulders with traditionalist folks in Alt-Right and Ethno-Nationalist circles and need to remind some of them why I have certain problems with Roman Catholicism. That includes Eastern Orthodoxy.
*_"Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification"_* en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joint_Declaration_on_the_Doctrine_of_Justification
*_"A Betrayal of the Gospel: The Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification"_* by *Paul T. McCain* -- *_First Things_* www.firstthings.com/blogs/firstthoughts/2010/03/a-betrayal-of-the-gospel-the-joint-declaration-on-the-doctrine-of-justification
*_"LCMS - The Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification in Confessional Lutheran Perspective"_*
www.lcms.org/Document.fdoc?src=lcm&id=339
*_What Lutherans Believe about Salvation_* by *Jordan Cooper*
ua-cam.com/video/vedNLmLSbSo/v-deo.html
*_"Does James disagree with Paul on Justification? An Exegetical Comparison of Romans 3.27-43 & James 2.14-26"_* (2014) by *Nathaniel F. Walther* www.wlsessays.net/bitstream/handle/123456789/51/Walther.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y
*_Iustitia Dei: A History of the Doctrine of Justification_* [3rd Ed.] (2005) by *Alister McGrath* furfeathersntales.files.wordpress.com/2017/05/iustitia_dei__a_history_of_the_christian_doctrine_of_justification.pdf
^^^^^One might have to bring up that PDF through another browser beside Google Chrome. Rounding things out....
*_Can a Consistent Eastern Orthodox Believer Be the Bible Answer Man?_* by *James White* of *_Alpha & Omega Ministries_*
ua-cam.com/video/F5EPs9EqIsc/v-deo.html
*_Mary: Sinless Queen of Heaven or Sinner Saved by Grace?_* *Robert Sungenis* vs. *Tony Costa* _(video courtesy of Acts17Apologetics)_
ua-cam.com/video/Wus6CrzleRw/v-deo.html
Response to the Papacy arguments - If the early church understood Matt 16 as Peter or his faith without reference to successors, why then did the church claim to have successors to St Peter in the Papacy? Why does the early church writings have to clearly state doctrines that are later held in church history? Cannot the Holy Spirit guide the church over time to have a deeper appreciation of the biblical texts? Jesus did promise the Holy Spirit to guide the church into all truth. Cardinal John Henry Newman's understanding of church history on the development of doctrine may assist you in this regard.
Response to the Saints - Jordan rejects the papacy based upon no early church witness, but he also rejects praying to the saints when there is an early church witness. Jordan's criteria for rejecting the Catholic church is clearly not based upon any witness or lack of witness in the early church.
Praying to the saints is not worship, but dulia as honor. Correct worship of God is latria through sacrifice. Jordan claims prayer to the saints leads to idolatry, but Catholic teaching clearly distinguishes between prayer to the saints and the worship of God, thereby preventing idolatry. Jordans lack of support from scripture is irrelevant because the Catholic church does not follow the false theory of sola scriptora.
Sacrifice of the Mass - Hebrews does discuss the resurrected Christ acting as a priest in the order of Melchizedek who offers gifts and sacrifices in the heavenly sanctuary. Hebrews does speak of the ongoing activity of Jesus offering himself as a sacrifice (Heb 9:23) to cleanse the sanctuary, which consistent with the mass. If there is no more sacrifice after the cross, how does Jesus continue to act as a priest forever as Hebrews says? What are yo to make of the gospel accounts of the institution of the Eucharist and the historical witness of Christ in the Eucharist? Why believe anything Luther taught about the Eucharist when he had no authority and came up wit many novel doctrines about all things Christian?
Infallible Magisterium - Jordan Rome is not the same by comparing Bellarmine and Karl Rahner. But Rahner has no athority in the church at all other than a theologian. Rome position does not change because Rahaner taught something different to Bellarmine or Trent.
Trent's claims account for the development of doctrine, which means Trent did take into account changes over time within the church on matters of doctrine. Rome can make statements to explain church doctrine in diverse ways to account for different aspects of doctrine and doctrinal development.
Justification - Faith alone theology is only an eisegesis of a select number of passages which has many problems. Justification is really i a covenant setting and any reference to a judgement must be understood within the covenant between the Father and humanity through Jesus as the mediator.
St Paul repeatedly speaks of being in Christ as transformational language.
The gospel is the new Exodus, new creation, new covenant, restoration of Israel and the ingathering of the nations to Zion, focussed on the church as the new Israel with the Eucharist at the centre. The gospel is not justification by faith alone -
Faith is not an instrument, but a habit and an act.
There never was any imputation of man's sins to Christ's account.
There is never any imputation of Christ's merit to the sinners account.
There never was any great exchange which involves any legal fiction.
Faith is always an act that infers a union with hope and love, contrary to Luther's doctrine.
Works of the law refer to covenant works, or any work of grace. If so, faith alone theology is false, for faith is a work of grace, excluded by faith alone theology. Rom 4 refers to both faith (Rom 4:3) and hope (Rom 4:18) and Davids (Ps 32) conversion as a resurrection to new life. This is hardly the language of faith alone and extrinsic righteousness.
I found recently this article about Justification. I thinks it will like you: chnetwork.org/2020/01/29/a-damning-system-of-works-righteousnesspart-i-are-catholics-even-christian/
@@efraincastro7214 There are no solas in the bible. The entire solas based system is a fiction. The works St Paul refers to are works of the Mosaic law, or works without grace. Faith alone is a fiction.
@@johnmartin1335 Did you see the link? I believe the same as you.
@@efraincastro7214 Works righteousness is a Protestant invention about the RCC. Just another trashy piece written by an ignoramus.
Right on!
I agree with you on points 1, 2, 4, 5. Nevertheless, I do not agree with your point 3. In Hebrews 13:10, "altar" would be meaningless - just as our use of the same word for the Eucharistic table - without the idea of the Mass being a representation of the only sacrifice of the cross. Moreover, the Roman Canon was composed on basis of the Epistle to Hebrews, see Fr Matthew Olver, "Hoc Est Sacrificium Laudis: The Influence of Hebrews on the Origin, Structure, and Theology of the Roman Canon Missae". I would also add that God is beyond the time-space, and that the Eucharist is the way by which we, creatures limited to the time-space, have access to the timeless unique sacrifice of Christ on the cross. Otherwise, "a Priest FOR EVER after the order of Melchizedek" is meaningless. The "intercession" of Heb. 7:25 is also a continuous action.
It's the job of the enemy sniper to take down the lead man of an army. Jesus knows that. That's why He said these words to Peter:
“Simon, Simon, Satan has asked to sift all of you as wheat. But I have prayed for you, Simon, that your faith may not fail. And when you have turned back, strengthen your brothers.” Luke 22:31
Noticed that Jesus specifically addressed Peter, among the Twelve. Why?
That's why I remain a Catholic.
Peace
@TRUST IN CHRIST CONFÍA EN CRISTO
I am afraid the above reply doesn't explain why the enemy sniper puts the lead man - in particular - onto his cross-hair.
A *headless* church is not found in the divine blue-print of the Church when Christ formed it 20 centuries ago. That is why I remain a Catholic.
Peace
@TRUST IN CHRIST CONFÍA EN CRISTO
True, Christ is the head of His Church, but He made Peter His in-charge.
In Luke 22:31, Christ specifically addressed Peter among the Twelve, letting him know that the enemy sniper would put him in his cross-hair. He further assured Peter of His prayers that his faith will not fail. In addition, Jesus directed Peter to 'strengthen' the rest of his brothers. For the other 11 apostles watching as the scene unfolded before them, there's no mistaking Christ's intention for Peter. This is why a church without a head cannot be the true blueprint of Christ's Church. This is why I remain a Catholic.
Peace
@@econs999
When the current pope says catholics worship the same God as the muslims, do you find that strengths your faith along with the faith of your fellow catholics?
@@prayunceasingly2029
Catholics and Muslims worshipped the one God of "Abraham, Isaac and Jacob" and sought to do God's will. To that extent, the pope is not wrong in his comment. And to that extent, he is not watering down the Catholic faith.
This, by the way, is what is meant by the statement that "3 religions share the same Abrahamic faith" ie the Jewish faith, the Muslim faith and the Christian faith. Why? Because in each religion's scripture you will find the characters of Abraham (the father of faith), Isaac, Moses. Why, even Mary is accepted by all these 3 religions as the mother of Jesus.
So, at its root, all 3 religions overlap, though not completely to be sure.
Peace
@Asaph Vapor
You say Muslim do not believe in the same GOD because *they do not believe in the resurrection of Jesus and the Trinity* .
I agree with you.
It is just that you didn't read carefully enough my comment that Muslims share the same _Abrahamic_ faith of the Jews and Catholics. Meaning, the faith father Abraham had then didn't include the resurrection of Jesus nor the Trinity too. All he knew then was that there was ONE sovereign God who he is called to worship. Same for the Jews. Same for Catholics.
Peace
I left rcc bc of the hypocrisy that it teaches and imposes on me, I became suicidal and hypocritical while in rcc even at those rcc areas.
Glad you got out of that snake pit. (;-D
I've belonged to numerous churches (mostly Protestant) in my time. Have yet to belong to one without hypocrisy in it.
No one can impose hypocrisy on you, except perhaps when you are a child. You either choose to act against your conscience, or you don't.
@Chad _Monarch I dont have an argument there, seeingt as how i dont belong to any denomination.
@Chad _Monarch Haven't read much I've written, have ya. I left the RCC long ago, became Prot. Read allot. Went to Baptist seminary. Read allot. Returned to RCC. ...But that doesn't mean I don't see that huge problems in it in our era.
Baptist here. Loved this.
You’re a great lecturer
Two quick questions…
1. How many Eucharistic miracles has any other church experienced?
2. Was God wrong for asking Moses to create a bronze serpent because they eventually worshiped it?
1) The Eucharistic miracle in itself does not justify anything.
2) What happened to the bronze serpent? He was destroyed as soon as they worshiped him in 2 Kings 18:4
@@CamminareSulleAcque so you’re agreeing the miracles take place but you’re saying satan is responsible or God performing miracles by placing his own blood into the bread is not important?
If you’re being criticized by either podcast you’re most likely doing something right
If the catholic church is being criticized for 2000 plus years....it must be touching sensitive nerves societies now a-days can not with withstand...so much that they create their own churches 🤦🏽♂️
Just a correction on two errors presented in the first couple of minutes. Both have to do with the Papacy. #1 Jesus said to Peter 'You are Kepha, and on this Kepha, I will build my church". There is nothing in the phrase that points to another interpretation. The Petras vs Petros argument is invalid, as there is no way the Greek language allows for Peter to be given a name with a feminine ending (Petras). It would be as if Jesus was calling Peter "Roquelle" or such.
#2 There is definitely evidence that Jesus meant for Peter's office of Pope to have successors. The OT scripture Jesus is referencing when he tell Peter that he will have the "Keys to the Kingdom", is in Isaiah, when King David is speaking to Eliakim, his Prime minister, to whom he gives the "keys to the Kingdom". This office of Prime minister is one that has successors and one that does not disappear after the current Prime minister dies. With the Keys, Jesus made Peter his prime minister, and every 1st century Jew would have understood that this was an office to be perpetuated after Peter's death.
When someone commmented against on his video about errors. He did not even waste a minute to reply 😊😊😊
Protestants has alwayd this kind of notion
Let’s see Jesus died for our sins and handed off the church to a series of evil murderous
Popes who traditionally believe they are god
Popes have allowed and encouraged abuse of nuns and children with rapes
They have covered it up
and protect guilty priests.
Why would Jesus die on the cross if you can pray to a pope saint or mother goddesses
Mary. Fatima Guadeloupe
Seems like a smart and sincere guy. Perhaps this format doesn't allow for the depth these issues require. For example, regarding the early Church and the papacy; that was a running broad jump over Irenaeus from Ignatius to Nicaea.
www.textexcavation.com/irenaeusah3.html#chapter3
That said, I found the Bellarmine/Vatican 2 commentary to be rather astute.
Is. 22
in that day,
I will call My servant Eliakim the son of Hilkiah;
21 I will clothe him with your robe
And strengthen him with your belt;
I will commit your responsibility into his hand.
He shall be a father to the inhabitants of Jerusalem
And to the house of Judah.
22 The key of the house of David
I will lay on his shoulder;
So he shall open, and no one shall shut;
And he shall shut, and no one shall open.
23 I will fasten him as a peg in a secure place,
And he will become a glorious throne to his father’s house.