Are Bishops Biblical?

[@dennisd3926]

1) Thank you. 2) More please.

[@daviddabrowski01]

You know Joe is cooking when you’re shouting “let’s👏🏻go👏🏻” while listening. Or maybe it’s just me 😅

[@tonyl3762]

I've been pounding the Timothy and Titus drum for awhile. Catholic apologists need to be pounding it more. They are the Scriptural proof of authoritative successors to the Apostles. Much better example than Council of Jerusalem.

[@Onlyafool172]

These epistles just made me think yep catholicism or nothing

[@robertlaprime6203]

I think when you couple them with the council of Jerusalem especially when you make the connection between the council and Jesus’s model settling disputes of one who has sinned against another it’s clear in the council that this exact model was used to authoritatively dispel heresy from the church and it was the Apostles and “elders” who made the decision. Thus the Bible proves that Christ intended there to be things such as ecumenical councils which and they hold apostolic authority to teach infallibly.

[@SolaPastora]

I would try to explain that Jesus didn’t teach about circumcision for new converts. The councils and the Holy Spirit draws the ecclesial answers for questions that weren’t taught.

[@tonyl3762]

@@robertlaprime6203 The Council of Jerusalem was led and dominated by Apostles (Peter, James, Paul, Barnabas, etc.). Protestants deny post-apostolic authority to teach and settle disputes. So the strongest and most convincing evidence will be authoritative Church leaders in Scripture who are not Apostles but chosen by the Apostles, and that is what Paul's letters to Timothy and Titus are (along with a few other passages like Heb 13:17 and Acts 20:28).

[@tonyl3762]

@@SolaPastora Not all but plenty of Protestants will concede the authority of the Apostles. The Council of Jerusalem was led and dominated by Apostles (Peter, James, Paul, Barnabas, etc.). Those same Protestants will then deny post-apostolic authority to teach and settle disputes. So the strongest and most convincing evidence will be authoritative Church leaders in Scripture who are not Apostles but chosen by the Apostles, and that is what Paul's letters to Timothy and Titus are (along with a few other passages like Heb 13:17 and Acts 20:28).

[@JH_Phillips]

That was awesome. Very thorough. Please continue and do one on the Bishop of Rome in the early church!

[@carakerr4081]

Happy All Saints Day! May God bless you and your family and the Shameless Popery ministry now and for all eternity and keep you always in His Holy and unending love 🙏💕🙏

[@MiguelTheFirst133]

Great timing, we just welcomed our new Archbishop earlier today.

[@QBlessed93]

I always look forward to new videos from your channel. Thanks for all the great information!

[@timrichardson4018]

Once I started considering the possibility that the Catholic Church is what it claims, I started noticing that the NT seems to take much for granted as already understood by it's audience, including the structure and authority of the Church. And it makes sense because the letters are mostly written to Christians in already well established Churches. Also, as I was exploring the Church, it struck me just how completely practical the early Christians were when serious questions came up. If the answer wasn't clear, they asked the apostles. If the apostles were all dead and gone, they asked those they appointed. If they were all dead and gone, they asked those ordained by men appointed by the apostles. A principle of studying history also suports the Cahtolic view of many things, including the structure of the Church. The Christians very close in time to the scriptures seemed to have a universal and uncontroversial understanding of the structure of the Church. Anytime there is virtually uncontested agreement on the meaning of scripture by those closest to it in time, it is much more likely their view is correct versus ours 2,000 years removed and relying on detailed analysis of ancient languages long since unused. And for 1500 years, to my understanding, the structure and authorty of the Church was uncontroversally undertood in the Catholic/Orthodox way.

[@TOB_IsTheAnswer]

Such an awesome vid. Thanks. Don't stop!

[@V14-x6n]

Fantastic episode. I honestly never realized (or gave it much thought) that Timothy and Titus were bishops (while knowing there were of course bishops in every town). It’s so much clearer now what Pail means when he talks about episcopoi, presboteroi and diaconos. Fr. Pacwa in one of his debates with a heretic (I think Janes White) gives and excellent explanation why the Apostles chose the name presbyter or elder rather than the word that actually meant priest in Judea. (I forget if it was greek translated from Hebrew or original Hebrew word). Absolutely looking forward to the talk about St Peter, even though it’s much more well-known subject, still and always enormously interesting.

[@francescoaccomando7781]

I have been binging your videos, one of the greatest catholic youtube channel, keep it up! One question: how long do you take to make an episode regarding the preparation of the topic and the sources?

[@marksteo6178]

Again an excellent presentation

[@audreymarsh5090]

Yes, definitely cover the early papacy!!! I would love to see that!

[@kerry8506]

Illuminating, as always, Joe.

[@jeanw9160]

Best channel ever ~ doesn't get any better!! ❤❤❤

[@kentadamson6992]

Another great video brother!

[@BensWorkshop]

Great episode Joe!

[@tonyl3762]

Protestants love to cite alleged early "Christian biblical canon" lists for their (despite the strong contextual evidence they are Jewish canon lists), yet these bishop lists are to be ignored and dismissed?

[@mussman717word]

They ignore all contextual evidence for everything, or else they'd be Catholic.

[@jasonstoodley4464]

I would definitely be interested in a follow-up episode about the papacy. You could connect the two by addressing the assertion that 1 Clement reflects a presbyterian leadership structure at Rome, with Clement just the elder in charge of communications. Also I’d like to see more attention on Eastern Orthodox claims about the development of the Papacy. Those claims have been part of what’s fueling what seems like a surge in converts from Catholicism to Orthodoxy as well as former Protestants deciding to become Orthodox rather than Catholic.

[@PapaGJournal]

Not that I can tell you what to do but this needs to be your next book. A book on Apostolic succession and the three tier church structure. Apostolic succession is a topic I have looked for by a recent author and didn't find one.

[@thisisit2878]

He already covers these concepts pretty well in The Early Church Was the Catholic Church and Pope Peter.

[@anthonydiaz2185]

I'd love a video on the papacy in the first centuries as it's something I've been wondering about a lot. Great video!

[@chilenobarrucia]

"You did not choose me, but I chose you and appointed you so that you might go and bear fruit-fruit that will last-and so that whatever you ask in my name the Father will give you" [Jn 15:16] Self-appointment or appointment between non-appointees were never options in Christ's Church.

[@ElvisI97]

I agree that *merely* self appointment or appointment between non-appointees were never options. There is what one would refer to as “the call”. This is what many if not all ministers claim to receive. I don’t know if there are anyone who merely claims that they are self appointed.

[@chilenobarrucia]

@@ElvisI97 The "call" is the way it starts. But the call leads to presenting oneself before the Church authorities to be appointed by them. Appointing oneself from the call alone is what usually results in false prophets.

[@anonymouscrank]

Well done, Mr. Heschmeyer.

[@joelsims5433]

I like that the auto captions think your channel is called “Seamus Popri”

[@lynnedwards8333]

I love Joe! I have listened to many, many apologists off and on KZbin and JOE IS THE BEST! Organized. Logical in presentation. Great notes provided. Generous of spirit with our separated brethern. Super knowledgeable. Presentation style is easy to follow. Just a wonderful teacher! Did i say how much i enjoy him?❤

[@michaelbeauchamp22]

This is a fascinating breakdown so far. I had already been arguing that Timothy was, if not a bishop, some sub-apostolic role since he had the authority to appoint bishops. But recognizing that Timothy was a judge over the elders is something I never noticed. Looking for the role instead of the word is very useful

[@graysonenglish8724]

Thank you for your videos. Please do cover the papacy in the early church!

[@nostalja77]

Sorry there wasnt any, Roman Bishop had no more authority than any of the others, even by Nicea in 325.

[@dynamic9016]

Really appreciate this video..Insightful.

[@emilyzlockard]

Yes please to episodes about the early papacy!

[@nostalja77]

A Papacy was unknown in the early Church, the Bishops of Rome centuries later started to push for it. A lust for power, and they finally got around AD 608. And as all power corrupts, "Absolute Power" corrupts absolutely.

[@emilyzlockard]

What do you make of St Irenaeus, a student of Polycarp who was a student of the Apostle John, writing in only the 100s, saying “For it is a matter of necessity that every Church should agree with this Church, on account of its pre-eminent authority”? And what about Chalcedon? The Pope’s delegates say that the Pope will choose to “ratify” the council’s decision, and mentioning that the Bishop of Rome “who is the head of all the churches” will allow someone specific to attend. And the bishops did not disagree. This is centuries before the 600s. Apparently Constantinople alone didn’t like the language and Pope Leo wrote to him with strong language that he was wrong, and that was the end of it. There’s a long history going all the way to the 100s.

[@nostalja77]

@@emilyzlockard Yes like most of Romish doctrines it developed over time. Leo the Great around 450 was certainly in a great position with the disintegration of the Western Empire there was a nice big void to fill. And his meeting with Attila the Hun too show how the Church was moving further from its beginnings. Eventually with Gregory the Great the Papacy would further expand its administrative authority, the papal states, the sinister Donation of Constantine and so on. The Glory departed. It became a political system as it is today. A far cry from the early Church, with all respect to you. No message, no salvation offered to its people or even the ungodly, no evangelisation , its all about the "church" and dogma. Even the fact there s over a billion members! The people of God have always been in the minority through history.

[@jacquesvincent3897]

There's no pope in the bible ...nor nuns ...nor covents...nor monks nor infants baptism😉😉 ...and so on !!!😉.....and the ROCK is Jesus and no one else . 1 Corinthians 3:11 “For other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ.” 1 Corinthians 10:4 “And did all drink the same spiritual drink: for they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them: and THAT ROCK WAS CHRIST.” John 4:22 “Ye worship ye know not what: we know what we worship: for salvation is of the Jews.”.....not the Romans!!!

[@andrefouche9682]

Excellent as usual!

[@jamesajiduah2001]

Felix Cirlot has a good argument that both the terms bishop and deacon designated the two offices of priest and deacon respectively. The office we call bishop evolved from evangelists/deutero-Apostles like Timothy and Titus.

[@chrisharrison6220]

Really great talk, you present really well, thank-you very much, God bless you in all that you are doing.

[@emperor_mozzy]

"The one time we see democracy in the Bible is when the people choose Barabbas over Jesus." 1:01:09 I love this line.

[@andrewpearson1903]

There are good moments where the people do God’s will, like when they accept David as king in 2 Samuel 5. But yes, there are no biblical instances where democracy is praised for its own sake. Nor is monarchy, for that matter - political systems or figures are judged on whether they do the will of God

[@francescoaccomando7781]

@@andrewpearson1903 But even then, the king was given because of the jelousy of the israelites towards the other nations. They were not supposed to have a king, but God granted it and set up rules for them, because originally they were to have God above them not a king. Nevertheless, they also got a foreign king which they were not supposed to have.

[@elf-lordsfriarofthemeadowl2039]

around 42:00 You're mentioning the definition of what was called a church requires a Bishop, and isn't just a Bible Study group. This reminds me of the difference between the Temple and Synagogues. The later being places of revering and learning from Scripture, and the former the center of true worship.

[@joeybwalsh]

This is the earliest I’ve been

[@HenryLeslieGraham]

last time i was this early the canon was not closed.

[@deutschermichel5807]

​@@HenryLeslieGrahamIs the canon closed, though? I think it was Jimmy Akin who said that it would pose no problem or contradiction for the Catholic Church to declare the canonicity and divine inspiration of 3rd or 4th Maccabees.

[@HenryLeslieGraham]

@@deutschermichel5807 sure. but my comment was tongue in cheek

[@HenryLeslieGraham]

@@deutschermichel5807 I have no problem with considering 3 & 4 Maccabees to be scripture, along with psalm 151. im a bit doubtful of odes however since it just seems to be a collection of various OT passages. I am not sure 1 enoch is spurious either.

[@deutschermichel5807]

@@HenryLeslieGraham yeah tbh I never read the extra books that various Eastern or Oriental churches have in their canon. Gotta catch uo with yʼall

[@ToddJambon]

Having no hierarchy in the church would be like a high school having no teachers or principals, and simply letting the smartest kids teach and make decisions. Why would Jesus give the apostles the authority to teach and lead the Church in their territories if not to.....teach and lead the Church in their territories? And to answer the question about if we want a video about what the Bishop of Rome looked like in the early Church, we will always say yes to the Hesch.

[@ElvisI97]

Sure but I don’t know how this is relevant to Protestant churches. Pastors aren’t merely the smartest people in the church. However, being smart helps. There is still an observable office with relevant ordination responsibilities, requirements and authority.

[@ToddJambon]

@@ElvisI97 It doesn't have to do with every, or even most, Protestant churches. However, I have known people to go to non-denominational churches where they simply appoint elders from amongst the congregation. This is more of what I'm talking about.

[@ElvisI97]

@@ToddJambongotcha! Thanks for the clarification, I don’t agree with that either.

[@mussman717word]

​​@@ElvisI97 Who granted these so-called "pastors" their authority? If it isn't derived from Apostolic succession, then their "ordination" couldn't possibly be valid. Under the fallacy of Sola Scriptura, anybody can get up there and start a "church." I really don't mean to be as defensive as I know I sound, but nobody should expect to be taken seriously as a pastor while preaching Sola Scriptura because it intrinsically undercuts their own value and necessity. If anybody can just go and interpret Scripture as it is, who needs 'em? And if you do need 'em, then it's not really Sola Scriptura, so why break off from the Church that Christ established in the first place? It's totally circular logic, man. His analogy about kids leading the classroom is spot-on, and there's really no means of finessing your way out of it. Again, I hope this didn't come off as too rude. I'm just not one for tip-toeing through the tulips. God bless!

[@geckosman]

Hey Joe! I don't know if you saw, but Javier Perdomo made another "rebuttal". I'm just wondering if you were going to respond.

[@Vaughndaleoulaw]

Is it in anyway substantive (ie. addressing Joe's actual argument)?

[@geckosman]

@Vaughndaleoulaw He is trying to discredit the syllogism Joe is using for his argument

[@geckosman]

@Vaughndaleoulaw First reply got lost somehow. Javier claims that the syllogism in Joe's argument is bad and that if Joe's argument is true then all of Christendom would be false (i.e. mutually assured destruction).

[@geckosman]

​@@Vaughndaleoulaw I don't know why my comment keeps disappearing. Javier tried to say that the syllogism in Joe's argument is false and that if Joe's argument is true then Christianity fails (i.e. mutually assured destruction)

[@bearistotle2820]

​@@VaughndaleoulawNope. He doesn't get that we don't claim the perspecuity of tradition, magisterium, or Scriptire alone. So, his attempt to reverse the argument by replacing scripture with tradition or the magisterium doesn't work. He also says stuff like, "Why are you appealing to scripture when you said the bible isn't clear?" And he is also doubling down on the useless "Ecclesialist" label.

[@canibezeroun1988]

I read the requirements for bishop and there's clearly a difference in the requirements as the bishop had authority to teach.

[@BrandonLins]

Bishops do have authority to teach

[@TheMicdave]

Please make video about apostolic succession

[@kirkcooper6352]

Yes thanks for the excellent presentation I must say that this is one of my go to sites on KZbin for catholic apologetics and teaching, saying all that, I would love to see a continuation of this line of thought on the leadership of the church, so yes, the papacy, and how it related to the structure of the early church, finally, I would love to hear or see someone do a podcast on the Epistle to the Romans, an can this Epistle and Church paul wrote to, can it give any evidence of the catholic today ie the Roman Catholic Church should we see this title although in the past the protestants, used it as a negative, but this title with the Epistle to the Romans, can it be used as a positive for our church if not why not, I'm just hopeful that someone would take this up and really look into it, thanks again for this presentation.

[@TheGenFem]

Why, Joe!!! I can’t wait for you to address the blatant hypocrisy of Mr. Friel believing there should be a group of elders but one with authority while simultaneously rejecting the bishops and the Bishop of Rome.

[@WeakestAvenger]

It also addresses the issue of overseer/bishop and elder being used interchangeably in the NT. There was a "protopresbyter" among the presbyters, and eventually overseer/bishop came to be used only for the protopresbyter.

[@gunslinger5132]

Perfect timing

[@hollywoodburford]

It's the same time every week 😉 I love Joe's podcast lol.

[@jaynesager3049]

This is beautiful! In my years as a Protestant, I’ve notice a problem with the definition of authority. Seems as though many people regard it as some sort of privilege, not so much the ability to carry out responsibilities, of an office, in this case. And to enforce obedience, which seems to be a bad word in many church cultures. I use cultures plural, because the local congregation is often its own entity and has its own autonomy. It never escaped me that I saw hierarchical structure on the Early Church of Acts. Never could I unsee that.

[@TheCatholicNerd]

Great video but then you're a lawyer and you're using legal tricks like logical presentation and explaining things from beginning to end. Clearly a con man /s On a serious note, I saw a commenter complaint about " costumes" the bishops wear, maybe a good idea for a video would be an overview of the different vestments of the church and how they developed. Developed. Also point out that these are in that gray area between tradition and custom. As in the vestments are not necessarily divinely inspired but they are handed down and part of our liturgical patrimony.

[@MsGraciesPreschool]

New here! Hello.

[@hollywoodburford]

Hello

[@messenger.divinelight]

Hello!

[@StringofPearls55]

Hi!

[@shamelesspopery]

Welcome! And (based upon your user name) thanks for what you do!

[@saldol9862]

Allo

[@PapaGJournal]

I do not see how it is possible to know this information and not become Catholic.

[@ModernLady]

I used to be a Lutheran before becoming catholic. Imagine my surprise suddenly meeting people who didn’t even think priests was a thing!

[@haydongonzalez-dyer2727]

Great topic

[@iphidamasfilms1245]

that discussion at the beginning on the Bible not containing instructions on creating a church from scratch made me think how silly it is for protestants, who so love to accuse all kinds of Catholic doctrines of violating or trying to re-do Christ's "finished work on the Cross," to try to re-do Christ's work on the Cross whereby He, like Adam, has a Bride born out of His side.

[@gamerjj777]

Durinv these discussions we tend to forget the three tier mentioned by Ap. Paul in corinthians Apostles , Prophets ,and Teachers. And he expands it and reveals the fivefold ministry (or the four-fold) inserting Evangelists in between Teachers and Prophets. And also we tend to forget Apostles Paul and Bernanbas were ordained by the teachers and prophets of Antioch.

[@Robert-bm2jr]

I am interested in hearing about the early papacy.

[@MathAdam]

Todd Friel is the most protestant sounding protestant.

[@robertopacheco2997]

If the buck doesn't stop somewhere with someone, it stops no where with no one.

[@dariaschooler]

There is a clouding of far too many to the truth. They are zealous in their rejection of the one true holy and Catholic apostolic faith.

[@geraldhill7547]

Much clouding... "The Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church" is the name of Orthodox.

[@bearistotle2820]

​@@geraldhill7547 Early Christians: "You must be in communion with Rome." Eastern Orthodox: "Nuh uh!"

[@ElvisI97]

Which Holy and Apostolic Church lol

[@SolaPastora]

@@geraldhill7547The 2nd Council of Nicaea accepts the Papacy. Someone(s) is in schism.

[@geraldhill7547]

​@@SolaPastora Didn't Orthodoxy think Rome was first among equal Bishops and the Holy Spirit came on Christ like it says in the Bible? First among equals doesn't mean you appoint a high priest like the Pharisees had. Jesus is the High Priest now along the line of Melchizedek. The levitical (man) Priests are done, the curtain is torn asunder. The Holy Spirit wouldn't have had to come on Christ in the flesh if it was already from him. Looks like your Bishop separated because he established heresies. From an outside perspective anyway. Your thoughts?

[@deutschermichel5807]

Should I pilgrimage to Italy in 2025? I donʼt have anything better to do anyways

[@josephmiller3672]

YES! My friend and I are planning to go on a pilgrimage to Rome for the jubilee.

[@rouxmain934]

Tbh yes

[@shamelesspopery]

Italy is amazing! Expects crowds but also a lot of joyful experiences.

[@Catholiclady3]

Absolutely!! Italy is wonderful!

[@josh39684]

Literally had a talk about this with a Protestant the other day

[@DDickinson458]

Joe, I would love to see a video on the Papacy vis-à-vis the claims of the Eastern Orthodox against the Papacy.

[@xaelath7771]

"For this reason I left you in Crete, that you would set in order what remains and appoint *elders* in every city as I directed you, namely, if any man is above reproach, the husband of one wife, having children who believe, not accused of dissipation or rebellion. For the *overseer* must be above reproach as God’s steward..." Titus 1:5-7 Paul very clearly uses "elders" and "the overseer" interchangibly here: "appoint elders in every city... if any man is above reproach... for the overseer must be above reproach". "From Miletus he sent to Ephesus and called to him the *elders* of the church. And when they had come to him, he said to them '...Be on guard for yourselves and for all the flock, among which the Holy Spirit has made you *overseers* , to shepherd the church of God which He purchased with His own blood...' Acts 20: 17-18, 28 Again, he calls the elders "overseers". Since a bishop has the authority to appoint other bishops, it is not necessary that Titus or Timothy be of a higher rank than the other elders they we're tasked to find. The fact that Titus was asked to join Paul in Nicopolis over winter calls into question the idea that he was to be the permanent and only bishop of Crete, Nicopolis being on the mainland. It also worth noting that "elder" was a traditional Jewish title - members of the Sanhedrin were called Elders. Mean while, "overseer" was the Greek equivalent. These title are used interchangibly for the same office, signifying that in Christ, their is no distinction between Jew and Gentile.

[@kimrose2288]

Hey, Joe! Crazy fan from NEC here!🎉🎉 I live in " God's Country" in Ohio. We have new churches moving in and people walking away from the CC. My apostolate needs a resource for a program themed "Does it matter if I leave the CC?" Do you have any resources for a workshop? Thank you!

[@AcrosstheCanon]

Once I accepted the fact that the church pre-existed the New Testament Canon, it completely changed how I understood New Testament.

[@deutschermichel5807]

Same for me

[@macbride33]

Same! It's huge! Makes me want to be part of His Church and love His Church like Him!

[@macbride33]

Also, for me, years ago, after becoming Protestant, I always recognized that if I really looked at the catholic church, I'd have to recognize it as the first church on the planet and being started with the apostles, therefore, it will be the true church. Then I'll have a decision to make.

[@user-ks3qr5fk6m]

Best comment. The arguments for Sola Scriptura don’t make sense when we realize that Christ left a Church and His Church gave us the Bible.

[@macbride33]

@user-ks3qr5fk6m 💯

[@hglundahl]

6:22 One way to look at it is, all mentions of "episkopos" actually refer to what we call "simplices sacerdotes" or "presbuteroi" ... Bishops are actually mentioned, but under a variety of names, none of which is in the NT era as yet bishop. One of the arguments of the convert who said so, was, St. John was obviously a bishop, not just a presbyter, as one of the twelve. I e, St. John the hagiographer was the Son of Zebedee, one of the twelve first bishops. Now, this argument would fall if instead Fr. Jean Colson was right, that St. John the hagiographer was NOT one of the twelve, but a lesser ranking disciple in the NT hierarchy, however a Cohen ("known to the high priest" and the fact he did not react as was said about ALL the twelve when he's individually mentioned and the fact an Asia Minor adult resident early CF spoke of "John who has worn the golden head band" rather than of "John, one of the twelve" ...). So, if that is true, the reason he called himself presbyteros and not ever episkopos may have been he never was raised to the episcopate in the first place. That would also delete "presbuteros" as one of the names for de facto bishop. He then reasoned, there were different classes of bishops which were all mentioned: Apostles, as witnesses to the Resurrection, up to 500, depending on how many of them weren't raised to episcopate or couldn't be as in being women, Evangelists, as in missionary bishops, Angels, an ad hoc or very regional term for local bishop in Asia Minor ('"write to the angel of the Church of Ephesus") and two actual bishops are given without us ever hearing their then and there title, namely Titus and Timothy. When Timothy ordained a "bishop" for Beroea, he ordained a priest. He himself was bishop, but St. Paul didn't actually call him that. As Beroea is c. 3 days' walk from Thessalonica, I'm pretty sure St. Timothy was providing them with someone who could locally celebrate the Eucharist. But perhaps you were leading up to this point anyway ...

[@MotherLovingChristian]

This comment section is a plurality of equal comments with no pinned comment, argument invalid.

[@shamelesspopery]

Nice try, but you're gonna have to do better than that to get a primus inter pares pin!

[@MotherLovingChristian]

@ There are three reasons I should get the pin! 1st (among equals) “the habitation of pinned comment has become desolate, and no one dwelleth therein.” 2nd “his pinnedrick let another take” 3rdly, “wherever the pinned comment is, there is the Shameless Popery comment section.”

[@joelancon7231]

Hey Joe! What does the prayer life of an average Catholic Answers Apologist, or a Catholic Scholar or any kind of average intellectual, if it wouldn't cause pride what does your own prayer life like?

[@SolaPastora]

It’s nice that you take your time to debunk multiple ‘chircches’ while proving Catholicism.

[@manuelpompa-u5e]

actually this is the one time i agree with joe. there are 3 recognized positions in the Christian church. bishop, elder and deacon. elder is the modern equivelent of "pastor".

[@housecry]

There's a video entitled, "Mary's Perpetual Virginity: Martyrdom of Polycarp & Apostolic succession! Sam Shamoun" from The Apologist Cut channel. Sam discusses the seven churches in Revelation. He claims the "angel" of each church is actually the bishop of that particular Christian community. I've heard many possible interpretations of Revelation. I have never heard anyone teach the "angels" or "messengers" of each church is Christ speaking to the bishop of each of the seven churches. He focuses on the church in Smyrna. Joe, maybe you can listen to Sam's defense of apostolic succession using Polycarp, bishop of Smyrna. I found it fascinating.

[@housecry]

25:00 I see I got ahead of myself. Lol

[@OGDavidThomas]

Very good video, and one that shows the disconnect between Modern American Protestantism vs even High Church Protestantism (which is by and large still more respectable, at least when Orthodox, so not the CofE)

[@ianpardue2615]

Can you do a video on priests and how the word priest came to be from the word presbyter?

[@rickydettmer2003]

Joe’s shirt is legit, on fire, lit, and all the other words the street youths are using these days. This comment deserves a pin 🤷‍♂️

[@JailHousePreacher]

Question: If Timothy has the full responsibilities as Bishop in 1 Timothy. What does he receive with the laying on of hands in 2 Timothy which is several years after 1 Timothy? Was he able to act as Bishop due to the authority of Paul until being Ordained. That is why Paul was so eager to see him? Just trying to connect the dots. Thanks @shamelesspopery

[@theologyteacher230]

Do one on the Bishop of Rome in the early Church!

[@clpage86]

Yes please!

[@preettygoood7774]

Todd Friel really cooked in this video

[@brwnbn]

Thanks for this. What do you think of Alistair Stewart's "The Original Bishops" thesis?

[@jay.mona.31]

@41:05 it is not the Epistle to the Ephesians though.

[@paulktemplar]

Please I have a question. In a city with more than one Catholic bishop; let’s say there’s a Coptic Catholic bishop, a Maronite Catholic bishop and a Latin rite bishop in one city. Who is the heavenly recognized bishop?

[@georgepierson4920]

All three Bishops can only function within their particular Rite. For example, a Latin Rite Bishop has no authority over the Coptic Rite or the Maronite Rite.

[@paulktemplar]

@ so who is the heavenly recognized successor of the apostles in that city?

[@georgepierson4920]

@@paulktemplar They all are successors of the Apostles.

[@paulktemplar]

@@georgepierson4920 what about bishops of churches not in communion with Rome?

[@georgepierson4920]

@@paulktemplar The Catholic Church recognizes the bishops of the Orthodox Church, the Polish National Catholic Church and the Assyrian Church of the East.

[@borealopelta7284]

It’s basically over for me, I don’t think I can be a protestant anymore. I still don’t think I can be catholic, there are too many inconsistencies and contradictions for me with them but, I am moving in the direction of orthodoxy

[@andrevaca6700]

What are some of the contradictions that you see?

[@damnedmadman]

Good, just remember that true Orthodoxy is just Catholic 🙂

[@borealopelta7284]

@ well I know that you have to interpret everything charitably. Obviously this current pope is a struggle for so many people, I think his stance on the death penalty differs from early Christianity. I think JP2 saying muslims worship the same God as Christians ( I know they are still deemed incorrect) insanely problematic. I have heard many catholic apologists try to defend this and it just sounds like special pleading. But honestly I think just going back to Augustine makes it clear enough. He altered the view of original sin, it transformed into original guilt. So now we are born guilty of Adam’s sin that’s why he posited the idea that babies that aren’t baptized go to hell because they are guilty. This is clearly absurd. You can see early church fathers talking about free will, original sin and babies being innocent before Augustine and none of them remotely agree with him. The orthodox held onto more traditional views held by the early fathers while the Catholics adopted more views from Augustine. They are more I will have to think of that is just a few off the top of my head that I can’t get past.

[@jayguevara6153]

At least with Orthodoxy you will have valid sacraments and validly ordained priests. If that's as close to the Catholic Church as you're going to get it's better than remaining Protestant. God bless you in your journey!

[@borealopelta7284]

@ thank you

[@itt23r]

Since you ask, with Advent only 1 month away, I'd really like to hear your views on the true dating for Christmas. And in that regard I would be particularly interested in your take on the theory that Easter and Christmas occurred on the same day. I personally find this idea extremely intriguing since a very convincing empirical proof of God's existence is packed into that recognition. Are you familiar with this theory? It seems to me to be a very Catholic argument in that it appears to support the Catholic position wherever a controversial theological issue is raised. So I would like to hear from an expert if I am right in my assessment. And you would be doing a lot of people a great favor, too, in reviewing it, incidentally, since we have no interest in putting our faith in heresy if that is what you decide that it is.

[@damnedmadman]

I think you mean not Christmas but Annunciation having occurred on the same date, right?

[@itt23r]

@@damnedmadman Good question and understandable, but no. the position I am referring to is that Jesus was born on April 5, in 8 BC and rose for the dead exactly 40 years later on April 5, 33 AD. And the thing that makes this theory so intriguing (besides all the Old Testament foreshadowings to Jesus being 40 when He rose), is that every date associated with the Infancy Narratives pertaining to Jesus and John the Baptist land on very appropriate Jewish holidays that illuminate these events just as brightly as the Passover illuminates Christ's Passion. But it doesn't stop there either. Using the mathematical precedents established by the lives of Jesus and John all the important dates in Mary's life (the Immaculate Conception, her birthday, the Assumption, everything) land on extremely approriate Jewish holidays too. And there are 3 other important figures from the New Testament whose vital statistics are revealed as well (Sts. Joseph, Peter and Paul) and their dates also comply with the Hebrew calendar in the same remarkable way. This is what makes it an empirical proof, and an irrefutable one at that, since the odds of all those events both landing on Jewish holidays and being relevant Jewish holidays is in the stratosphere. But again, I would like to here from at least one expert on the subject to confirm what I think to be a miraculous discovery truly is.

[@damnedmadman]

@@itt23r Where did you get this calculation from?

[@itt23r]

​@@damnedmadman I've tried to tell you but this channel's editor will not allow it. So we'll see if this is enough. The best source for this position is a book called THE GOSPEL OF CREATION. And the third edition is available free online. Well worth doing a search for it if you are interested. But it is not easy to find. And since there are more than one book out there with that title, to make sure you have the right one it is also subtitled "Part1: Exploring the Word's Forgotten Scientific Side." I'd say more but this channel is apparently extremely threatened by it, even though it is free. Sad . The website also has a paperback 2nd edition that it is selling. But I do not recommend buying it. It was poorly written, incomplete and it contains several flaws. It is the free online third edition you are going to want to read. And the website seems to agree by offering it. In other words. they no longer seem to be trying to sell you anything, just trying to get the message out. And it is a good message. You won't be disappointed if you check it out.

[@itt23r]

@@damnedmadman If you are creative you can also find a way to it through my user name. And that's about all they'll allow me to say.

[@andrewgunawan4502]

lol where’s the outro music

[@hglundahl]

Was Malakhiah saying he was a Cohen?

[@hglundahl]

I Peter 5:1 Would obviously still argue for "presbyteros" being one of the original words for bishop. According to the views of that convert.

[@southernrebelgamer7505]

Why is my former bishop in the thumbnail?

[@hyrot1]

Joe, What do protestants have to say about Marian Apparitions? Ladd Pepke

[@nostalja77]

We see it as superstition, same with beads , hail Marys, crucifixes, pilgrimages, a saint for everything (e g taxi drivers in Catholic countries all have a saint for travellers on their dashboard) , this is all borrowed from paganism, pagans had a god for everything. All this and much more takes away the Glory of our Saviour.

[@thisisit2878]

​@@nostalja77You are a clown!

[@jacquesvincent3897]

THE FOLLOWING:Ecclesiastes 9:5-6..... 5-For the living know that they shall die: but the dead know not any thing, neither have they any more a reward; for the memory of them is forgotten. 6-Also their love, and their hatred, and their envy, is now perished; neither have they any more a portion for ever in any thing that is done under the sun.

[@BradleyGull]

I agree they are those 7 bishops, however I wonder in Revelation (Apocalypse) where the other churches bishops are? I know these are the writings of John from the East but just a curiosity. Also what is the connection here with Revelation 8, and also with the 7 Archangels? Or is it just the intrinsic importance of the number 7.

[@michaelbeauchamp22]

My guess is that the importance of the number 7 is part of why our Lord only spoke of the 7 churches under John's apostolic oversight, but they also may be meant to be understood as a microcosm of the whole kingdom of heaven. So, these 7 bishops are meant to be pictures of the 7 archangels in Heaven perhaps

[@paulmualdeave5063]

The problem with saying Roman 16:1 isn’t an office of female deacons is Chalcedon establishes how they are created.

[@bigfootapologetics]

Seems to be an Eastern/Western thing, but even in the East, the female "deacons" still didn't have any equivalent liturgical roles to the males or the ability to ascend the altar.

[@paulmualdeave5063]

@ There are Eastern Orthodox with ordained deacons. Reason & Theology shows a video of them giving the Eucharist.

[@ricardopenamcknight6407]

We want roman pope vids!

[@WePlugGOODMusic]

Also very slick move at 35:50 but out of the three places you reference, only Ignatius is talking about a bishop / single leader. I also thought this was meant to be about biblical evidence but you spend more than half of the video not talking about biblical evidence.

[@johnchung6777]

Wow to think that the scriptures which is not easy to understand and because of that scriptures leaves room for a little wiggling,so what happens when you start to wiggle what follows is a little divide and after that it becomes a wide gap or split hmmmm doesn’t sound like solidarity or unified?

[@bourbonrebel5515]

Can you do a video on polygamy? I have seen a couple Instagram accounts defending polygamy as a “biblical” marriage as the patriarchs did it and no where in the Bible does it condemn polygamy, so through sola scripture it can’t be said to be wrong. They also believe it’s just for the man. A woman can only have one husband but a man can have many wives.

[@jamessgian7691]

Doesn’t matter. Bible isn’t final authority because everyone disagrees on it and Jesus has Church as authority. Catholic Church has bishops so they are legitimate and approved by authority.

[@jacquesvincent3897]

THE CHURCH FINAL AUTHORITY ?????.....CHAPTER AND VERSE PLEASE!! 1 Timothy 3:2 “A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife,...OOOPPSS.

[@davidkilmer5268]

Yes

[@ElvisI97]

“These things [have been said] in order to show that to the men of old 👉the same men who were the priests were also the bishops👈; but gradually, as the seed beds of dissensions were eradicated, all solicitude was conferred on one man. Therefore, just as the priests know that by the custom of the church they are subject to the one who was previously appointed over them, so the bishops know that they, 👉more by custom than by the truth of the Lord's arrangement👈, are greater than the priests. And they ought to rule the Church commonly, in imitation of Moses who, when he had under his authority to preside alone over the people of Israel, he chose the seventy by whom he could judge the people.” Jerome's Commentaries on Galatians, Titus, and Philemon, trans. Thomas P. Scheck (University of Notre Dame Press, 2010), 289-90.

[@shamelesspopery]

Yes, but I think an honest assessment of the historical evidence would include mentioning that St. Jerome is completely alone in this view. And that he developed it in a reactionary way -- he was fighting against a deacon who argued that (as a representative of the bishop) deacons should be elevated higher than priests. But somehow, Protestants who don't even believe that there were priests in the early Church seize upon this (without knowing the context) and think it settles the historical question from a couple of centuries pre-Jerome.

[@mussman717word]

If Todd Friel ever makes it to Heaven, I suspect that his time in Purgatory will consist of him viewing himself walking in circles and listening to himself preaching heterodox teaching from the POV of the back of his head. His voice, mumbled and warped, eventually becomes nothing more than a soft hum, but his motions remain a stagnant 360° after 360°, twisting himself into impractical and imprecise circles until the end of time, or at least until he is saved by the grace of God that Christ left only with His One, Holy, Catholic, Romanist, Papist, and Apostolic Church.

[@cbooth151]

Is the word 'bishop' Biblical? Well, most Catholic Bibles don't use that word. However the RSVCE says at Phil. 1:1: "Paul and Timothy, servants[a] of Christ Jesus, "To all the saints in Christ Jesus who are at Philippi, with the *bishops* and deacons." So, yes, in one Catholic Bible, the word "bishops" _is_ Biblical. However, where does it say in any Bible that bishops *must* be celibate? After all, the Catholic Code of Canon Law says: "Clerics are obliged to observe perfect and perpetual continence for the sake of the kingdom of heaven and therefore are bound to celibacy." The answer is no. Bishops can be married. As 1 Tim. 3:2 says: "Therefore, a bishop must be irreproachable, *married only once,* temperate, self-controlled, decent, hospitable, able to teach." So, is the word "bishop" Biblical? Yes, but, is it Biblical to say that a bishop must be celibate? Absolutely not.

[@alanhales6369]

Shameless popery The Catholic and religious Bishop isn't the Biblical Bishop. The Biblical Bishop is the Pastor of the local church. The Biblical Greek meaning for, Bishop, Elder and Shepherd, and all the same Ministers, which is the Pastor of the local Church. The Biblical Ministers in the local church, are The Pastor and the Deacons (Which means, Helpers).

[@michaelbeauchamp22]

What do you make of Joe's case for the three-tiered system?

[@mmbtalk]

This is way too simplistic! the model for the churches was so varied; for starters who was the Bishop of the Church at Antioch? Joe's model is not supported if we read Acts 11:29,30 Acts 13:1-3, Also in Romans chapter 16, we see various house churches acting independently. 1 Corinthians chapters 1 and 14 suggest a different model from that of overall Bishop ruling over other elders! Obviously, a Catholic will always line up the ducks to suit his preferred model.

[@Joe-bc1kz]

Imagine having all this knowledge and still denying the truth!

[@hoid8069]

Am I the only one who finds Todd Friel's nonstop camera movement incredibly nauseating?

[@ichibancho]

You imply multiple times that "Apostle" is an office in the church.

[@johnp.6043]

The Bishop of one wife.

[@shamelesspopery]

Yes indeed! It was prohibited that a divorced and remarried man (or even a widower who had remarried!) should become a bishop. But obviously, this was a one wife MAXIMUM, not one wife MINIMUM. Otherwise, St. Paul (an unmarried man himself, as he reminds the 1 Corinthians, encouraging them to celibacy as well) wouldn't be able to be a bishop. And for that matter, Jesus himself wouldn't be able to be a bishop in his own church.

[@johnp.6043]

@ clergy never had a choice. Peter was married.

[@paulktemplar]

@@johnp.6043 Peter was either a widower or he never had sexual relations with his wife after meeting Jesus. Matt 19:27-29. The apostles had ‘sister-wives’ i.e women assisting them in ministry to other women.

[@eamonanthony6767]

Jesus created only one Church and at that time placed it into the care of Saint Peter, the one Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church and the gates of Hell including Satans evil free masons will not prevail against it, Saint Henry VIII invented the Crutch of England AKA the Anglican Crutch and an example of holyness is its current head the holy of holies Saint Charles lll yeah right lets get real and honest if thats possible SPP.