A Protestant Asks Scott Hahn to Prove the Papacy... w/ Scott Hahn and Cameron Bertuzzi

There is a big problem in this explanation. The Old Covenant Law was given by God to Moses, and then to the Children of Israel -- it did not take centuries to develop 'like an Oak Tree'. What happened in fact is that over the centuries, more and more burdensome works and doctrines were added to the Law, and Jesus finally called out the religious leaders for their abuse of God's Law and their hypocrisy.

The Doctrine of Salvation was given by Jesus to the Apostles, who then gave it to the early church. 1 Timothy 4:16 - "Watch your life and doctrine closely. Persevere in them, because if you do, you will save both yourself and your hearers."
Timothy did not tell Paul, "Let's wait a few hundred years until church leaders tell us what this doctrine is."

Paul also charged Timothy in 2 Timothy 3:14-17 - "But as for you, continue in what you have learned and have become convinced of, because you know those from whom you learned it, and how from infancy you have known the Holy Scriptures, which are able to make you wise for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus. All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, so that the servant of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work."

Notice that Paul said, "...Holy Scriptures, which are able to make you wise for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus." No future doctrines of the Roman Catholic Church mentioned here.

I am a former Roman Catholic saved at age 51 by the grace of God, through faith in Jesus Christ, just as Paul said to Timothy -- apart from the Catholic religion and its required works. My good works are the result of my salvation, not the cause of it.

Jesus specifically addressed those like Scott Hahn and the thousands of the catholic church people of wisdom. Jesus " I thank you Father for hiding the things of The Kingdom from the wise and revealing them to the children. " The " wise " are those who speak of things they know not of creating the doctrines of men. The children are those who accept the Word of God by faith. Beware the leaven of the catholic church.

Jesus specifically addressed those like Scott Hahn and the thousands of the catholic church people of wisdom. Jesus " I thank you Father for hiding the things of The Kingdom from the wise and revealing them to the children. " The " wise " are those who speak of things they know not of creating the doctrines of men. The children are those who accept the Word of God by faith. Beware the leaven of the catholic church.

The papacy is man made. Peter was NOT the first pope. As a matter of fact, there in NO evidence Peter was ever in Rome. Emperor Constantine started the Catholic Church in 315AD, and that started the entire Heresy of their belief.

I don’t understand why the kingship of Judah is used to embody unity. Am I the only one that sees the kingship as the cause of the split between Judah and the rest? Now we see the exact thing with the bishop of Rome. Correct me if I’m wrong but it seems like papal authority is the cause of most schism in the church. I’m not saying that disproves papal authority, but when people bring up unity as a reason for the papacy, it seems to have obviously had the opposite effect.

But when one man has control alone, that is not good as we are seeing. Regardless. Even the whitehouse has a body of people making decisions right? Honest comment not being snarky im looking into EO and RC

At. Paul wrote that church leaders need to be married…

God did not want to give Isreal a king to rule over them (Saul), but did so because they asked for it. It was not his original plan.

Dude dodged the question 😅. You can’t retrospectively add things to history that didn’t exist. History doesn’t work that way. Just because you want something to be true doesn’t mean you can just declare it into history. Where is the historical /biblical evidence of the assumption or the papacy . It’s just not there. We can’t just assume it because we want it to be so.

Genuinely curious and looking for a better answer. The video was informative, but the answer still doesn’t allign with history. Pope Honorius held not only fallible, but heretical views, and the bishop of Rome held a special seat as the first among equals, not supreme. So while the seat is successive, the points I mention still contradict the view in history.

Can anyone make a clearer argument for me?

absolutely fascinating.

Um that made zero sense

But not all the bishops recognized Rome's authority. It took the humbling of the North Africans (Alexandria and Carthage) long before Rome was considered the undisputed leader of Western Christianity.

More Roman Catholic gymnast to try to prove what cannot be proven!

Cameron's rebuttal:

.....

There is no Pope in the Bible. Case closed. The RC Church is man-made and corrupt.

I thought what Dr Hahn said was brilliant and very enlightening! However, in regards to his last point with implied authority why does that justify Papal Primacy instead of shared authority with all bishops (successors of the apostles) ?

God the Father is the real Pope. Jesus called God as his Father and ask us to pray to God the Father like in the Lord's Prayer that he taught us. Papacy is just a title given to earthly leader to lead the church of Jesus Christ!

Infallible? None of them are infallible. How do you know? What happens when you have two bishops who have differing views on a passage? Theres plenty of fallibility there.

Love this exchange between Mr. Bertuzzi and Dr. Hahn. This seems like an excerpt from a larger discussion which I haven't viewed in its entirety. My comment is, I wonder if it would be helpful to address the similarities between and the difference between the Catholic and Protestant theology regarding the sacred Scriptures. I am thinking here of the divine inspiration and inerrancy (similarities) on the one hand, and the 'material sufficiency' (Catholic position) vs. the 'formal sufficiency' (the Protestant position) of sacred Scripture on the other. Jimmy Akin did something on this and it was extremely helpful for me to get at the root of the interperative understandings. Generally and briefly, the 'material sufficiency' of sacred Scripture is the view that the entire 'Deposit of Faith' (the fulness of the truth Jesus Christ entrusted to the Apostles and to the Church) is 'materially present' in the Scriptures, but not in a formulaic or prosaic way as a theological proof text textbook, and also not always in a straightforward statement ("God is a Trinity"), but as a statement that requires the understanding of the history at the time the text was written, the genre of literature that is used, the the social mores and cultural mileiu present at that time, the political situation present at that time in history, and the experience of the interpretive community guided by the Holy Spirit. However, the sacred Scriptures aren't self explanatory and everything within them isn't equally stated in a straightforward manner in the way we would express ourselves in the 20th and 21st centuries in the modern west. The texts were written over a 1,000 yr period by various divinely inspired authors but in such a way that while it was them writing in their style, they inerrantly preserve and express what God would have us know regarding Himself and humanity in relation to Him.

Hahn’s point that doctrine develops slowly is a good one. That doesn’t support a Pope, who can speak infallibly ex cathedra, however, but a constant reevaluation of scripture.

Protestants always speak in soundbites.

One thing this also fails to address: how can Rome be so sure that they are the true church and not the Eastern Orthodoxy, as they were unified until Rome became a government rather than a church.

Happily a Protestant here. I will remain Protestant as I can’t biblically agree with a variety of doctrines and dogma from the RCC, but I can greatly appreciate this video and all he had to say. It gives valuable insight into the historical formation of the church and its progression to the modern day. However, I would also argue that this doesn’t actually reinforce the Papacy as much as it does the opposite. Then you factor in some of the abusive and degenerate behavior from some of the past Popes, which could have been avoided by modeling the apostles, rather than progressively consolidating total authority into the hands of one office. Regardless of our differences, may the Lord Jesus bless each one of you.

WHERE ARE THE PROTESTANTS?????????1111

Catholics do not have to prove anything from Scripture. If sacred tradition says it, then Scripture must bend to it, according to them.

Jesus picked Peter

Ask them this Protestant where is 66Bible alone and Faith alone in the bible?( fake saved- Anti Christ books 66(6#-causes separation/confusion to all) prideful/selfish ( see God’s wrath on your favorite letters of Paul) Read more on Gospel of Jesus( LoveGodNeighbor) Bring peace

Love by many ? I would be afraid !

The papacy is man made. This is why the catholic church has added so many things that aren't in scripture. The pope literally just oked transgender baptism. This is the issue with the papacy. Canon is closed you can't quote the old testament to defend the papacy

Matt Matt Matt, great guests, great wisdom, and I know it’s your show! But if you are going to have guests, let them TALK, without the distracting interruptions. Pleeease!

The issue isn’t even that the Bible doesn’t describe a papacy, it’s that it doesn’t accommodate anything could evolve into a papacy.

Please read some of these verses and reconsider your Catholicism and its papal and soteriological doctrines:

Galatians 1:8,9; 2 Thessalonians 2:15; Ephesians 2:8,9; Romans 11:6; 1 Timothy 4:2-3; Romans 3:27; 2 Timothy 3:16-17

He sure did a lot of talking but if it's not in the scriptures it doesn't mean anything he can assume what he thinks happened but it's not biblical

I must say I don’t find this answer convincing. Out of scripture the papacy seems indefensible to me. In fact it seems to clearly indicate the opposite. Peter was reprimanded by Paul and accepted Paul’s reprimanding. Christ definitely did not anoint Peter as some sort of King of the church and even less established some sort of Kingly line. He is King Himself and is the only King we need.

Catholicism... man adding rituals and human hierarchy back after Jesus removed them and paved the way for salvation by faith in Him and Him alone.

Gospel of Matthew, chapter 16 : “And Jesus came into the quarters of Cesarea Philippi: and he asked his disciples, saying: Whom do men say that the Son of man is? But they said: Some John the Baptist, and other some Elias, and others Jeremias, or one of the prophets. Jesus saith to them: But whom do you say that I am? Simon Peter answered and said: Thou art Christ, the Son of the living God. And Jesus answering, said to him: Blessed art thou, Simon Bar-Jona: because flesh and blood hath not revealed it to thee, but my Father who is in heaven. And I say to thee: That thou art Peter; and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. And I will give to thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven. And whatsoever thou shalt bind upon earth, it shall be bound also in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose upon earth, it shall be loosed also in heaven. Then he commanded his disciples, that they should tell no one that he was Jesus the Christ.”

The Apostle Paul who wrote most of the New Testament was not one of the original 12 Disciples. Paul was saved by Jesus Christ directly on the Demascus Road and neither does he refer to any structure of hierarchy in his writings.

Furthermore Jesus confirms that the Spirit of Truth, the Holy Spirit, which the Father would send will guide you into ALL Truth and show you the future.
(John 16: 13)

"But when He, the Spirit of Truth, comes, He will guide you into all the truth [full and complete truth]. For He will not speak on His own initiative, but He will speak whatever He hears [from the Father—the message regarding the Son], and He will disclose to you what is to come [in the future]."
John 16:13 AMP

Jesus further affirms that the Spirit of Truth with be with you and INSIDE you. (John 14:17)

"And I will ask the Father, and He will give you another Helper (Comforter, Advocate, Intercessor—Counselor, Strengthener, Standby), to be with you forever— the Spirit of Truth, whom the world cannot receive [and take to its heart] because it does not see Him or know Him, but you know Him because He (the Holy Spirit) remains with you continually and will be in you."
John 14:16‭-‬17 AMP

There is nothing inherently wrong in having any Church structure you please but when you fail to understand that it is the Spirit of Truth, the Holy Spirit, who lives INSIDE you who will guide you in ALL Truth and will show you what is to come in the future, then you will miss the boat like the Catholic Church recently did during COVID who closed all the Church worldwide over nothing more than the common flu.

Everything the Government and Media told us regarding Covid turned out to be lies or a grossly exaggeration including inter alia social distancing, mask wearing, efficacy of so-called "vaccines" and dangers of the so-called"vaccines".

The Roman Catholic Church merely went with the flow, never challenging the status quo while millions of people lost their jobs and businesses and their basic human Rights were violated.

Only a handful of mainly Protestant Christians stood up against Government tyranny through the guidance of the Holy Spirit.

Thought he did nothing to answer to question.

It's so bizarre that the catholics think that we need the pope and the catholic church to teach us what the scriptures mean when they have such un biblical beliefs in their church.

Ask Scott Hahn to justify the actions of pope Pius XII. He favorerd the Nazis over the Jews and approved the vatican visas given to escaping Nazis after WWII.

"I would say the doctrine develops gradually," and I'm out lol. Not even 2 minutes in.

There's a difference between recognizing what's taught in scripture and creating new doctrine that's not taught. One is Doctrinal Recognition, and the other is Doctrinal Accretion. Not the same, can't be equated.

The Holy Church gives us EVERYTHING we need for our Salvation: the sacraments, the teachings, the communion of Saints, the Bible and above all a full knowledge of the person of Christ made freely accessible to all. So we are not alone on our path to salvation. Please, let us pray for the Church and for our priests.

ojala toda mi gente entendiera la respuesta de esta persona, aunque tratan de desviarlo, El esta seguro de si mismo😇😇😇😇

Hahn waffles his way into a “it evolved over time “ argument that undermines the papacy. Are you sure Scott’s not a freemason plant?

I didn't understand, how was the pope anointed/created as a leader?

I wish he would’ve addressed the one scripture that was brought up to him. Maybe there’s another place he does.