«El fin de la sola Scriptura»: Una respuesta a Santi Alarcón

Hinzugefügt: 2026-05-28

[00:00:01][music] [music] [music] You are [music] you, you are you.

[00:00:50]Good afternoon. My name is Andrés Mesmer and we are the Credo network. We are a network of Protestants committed to the Spanish Protestant Reformation. Si tú eres protestante, esta redencia.

[00:01:04]The Spanish confession, the catechisms of Constantino de la Fuente, Juan Perde Pineda, Juan de Valdés, Casio de Reina, the instructions of the Bible by Francisco Encinas, Casio de Reina, and Crera es tu herencia. So if you don't know us, find us on social media, our website, and our YouTube channel. We also encourage you to look for this book for an introduction, a good introduction to the Spanish reform. Uh, one page a day, a quote from a Spanish reformer with a devotional meditation at the end and living faith. It can be Spanish or Hispanic, and it can be confessional. We thank the Lord for other confessional traditions, but if you want to be or remain in your own tradition, this great resource is now available.

[00:02:07]Okay, so this afternoon we'll do something a little different.

[00:02:11]And I confess that I have never, ever, ever seen a video of Santi Alarcón, as far as I can remember.

[00:02:23]Santi Alarcón. But the title caught my attention. I don't remember how I stumbled across the video, but the name of the video is "The End of Sola Scriptura" or "The End of Sola Scriptura in Latin."

[00:02:43]So what we're going to do is play the video and I'd like to make some comments. Before watching the video, I'd like to talk about [clearing throat][coughing] cartoons and straw men.

[00:03:02]Whether you are Protestant, Roman Catholic, Orthodox, or even if it has nothing to do with religion, if you are having a debate with someone, please do yourself and the world a favor and avoid caricatures and straw men, because they don't convince anyone and only contribute to division.

[00:03:31]We're going to see a cartoon, and it's not so much a cartoon, but... uh... this Santi doesn't understand, that's the main problem, he doesn't understand the historical context of the doctrine known as... uh... scripture alone, but he's not listening, he's not taking the time to read the primary sources.

[00:04:00]and secondary and to understand what in this case, the other side, we Protestants, are saying with this doctrine.

[00:04:13]So what has been invented is a caricature, a straw man, he ends by saying, this is the end of writing alone. As if he doesn't know who he is, I doubt he has academic degrees, I doubt he has done the necessary research to finish with just writing, but he says, eh, this argument is already done. So please let's avoid caricatures and straw men. Let us also remember, before the fall, the pride of spirit and that it is quite possible to have zeal for God, but not in accordance with true knowledge. Okay? There are many people on social media who want to serve the Lord. I don't know Santi, but I imagine, I imagine that he really wants to serve the Lord, that is, from his heart. Me imagino y es yo quiero pensar eso de él.

[00:05:24]But in this video that's not conveyed, I don't see it, and this is an excerpt from a longer conversation, okay? I understand that things can get heated at certain times, and that's fine, but what I see here, what I see here is not a humble spirit that truly honors the other person, but rather something more conflictive, someone who really doesn't want to listen and only wants to dominate and impose themselves. And I haven't seen the whole conversation. Maybe Jonathan was doing the same thing before or after, I don't know, but we have to remember, we have to have a humble spirit.

[00:06:11]When we lack a humble spirit and someone proves us wrong, there's really no going back. If we enter the conversation with humility and someone proves us wrong, great. Well, I came in with humility, but if we go in saying, "I'm right and you're wrong and you're distorting the meaning of this verse, this passage or whatever, and someone proves me wrong, well, it's much harder to go back."

[00:06:51]So with this we're going to watch the video and then I'm going to make some comments.

[00:07:01][snort] For the sake of the argument I'm about to make, I'd like to emphasize your answer again.

[00:07:10]In the time of the apostles, the only infallible authority of faith was scripture. She was not the only authority, but she was the highest.

[00:07:27]Okay. I'll rephrase. In the time of the apostles, the only infallible authority on matters of faith was scripture.

[00:07:40]in the time of the apostles, the gospel. You 're not answering me because the gospel can be transmitted through writing and through speech. So, [music] I repeat the question.

[00:07:53]The only infallible authority in the time of the apostles was the scripture, the most reliable. Yes, and Saint Peter says so, but he is not the only infallible one. Yes, the most reliable. Okay. Yes. The teaching of the apostles when they taught the gospel was infallible because of the gospel itself, not because of any quality of the apostles.

[00:08:18]Okay, it doesn't matter. Now, if you want, we can go back to that "most reliable" thing, which is a misinterpretation of the passage. Now, specifically, you have just agreed with me that scripture in the time of the apostles was not the only infallible authority. You just told me, but the most reliable one. Alright. Now we discuss the most reliable one, because if it is not the only infallible authority and there is another infallible authority, that infallible authority is also equally reliable. Now we'll discuss that point and that passage, which you 're misinterpreting. Now, Johy, if you admit that in the time of the apostles scripture was not the only infallible authority, then no condolences to scripture alone and to Protestantism. Johnny, why? Because number one, how are you going to pretend, Johnny, to defend it on the New Testament alone? If you are acknowledging that in the time of the apostles, scripture was not the only infallible authority on matters of faith. It doesn't make sense. I contradicted myself. If you're acknowledging that it wasn't the only one in the time of the apostles, how could the apostles teach that it was the only one? You ca n't prove it biblically, Johnny. So, because of that, because of that problem, you cannot meet this criterion that you set at the beginning. We have to make use of the method. You cannot fulfill the method because you cannot show me this doctrine from the scriptures.

[00:09:40]Because? Because you are acknowledging that in the time of the apostles the only infallible authority was not scripture.

[00:09:48]So, if for the apostles the only infallible authority was not scripture, for the apostolic churches the only infallible authority was not scripture; there was another infallible authority.

[00:09:58]The writing alone is over. Johnny, very good. Well, there we have the video of Santi Alarcón.

[00:10:13]Ah, some comments and these are some mistakes and I don't know if he's going to see them.

[00:10:20]Uh, I say this with respect, but so that he can better formulate the objections he has to writing alone. And by the way, before we get into this, let me tell you something that I think is important.

[00:10:36]Well, Roman Catholics have good arguments.

[00:10:43]and good responses to Protestantism.

[00:10:49]But many times [sigh][laughs] uh Roman Catholics who have good reasons, good uh answers, don't make a video saying, "That's the end of sola scriptura."

[00:11:03]Number one, they tend to be much more humble, and number two, they know that it is much more complicated than a single argument, and they usually know that we Protestants have very good responses to their responses. In other words, it is very difficult to take this position that with this line of questions I am ending the writing process alone.

[00:11:36]The first mistake I would like to mention, and this really is the mistake, I think it is perhaps the main mistake, is not understanding the historical and theological context of the Protestant Reformation.

[00:11:52]Okay, we're going to get to the first century, but let's talk about the 15th century first.

[00:12:00]In the 15th century, I think few people would dispute this, but the teaching of the church did not coincide with the teaching of the Bible.

[00:12:15]When that happens, what do we do as Christians?

[00:12:21]Because the Church was saying, "We have authority, we can teach.

[00:12:29]But when that teaching doesn't agree with the Bible, what do we do? You see? This was a problem in the 10th century. It was also a problem before that, but it all came to a head in the 15th century.

[00:12:47]That's the historical and theological context of the doctrine of sola scriptura.

[00:12:54]Now, it's not the origin of the doctrine because it's already found in the Patristic period, but it is the origin of that doctrine as we know it. I mean, if I'm Santi Alarcón, what he's saying is something as ridiculous as saying, Johnny, there was no scripture in the garden with Adam and Eve, so how can you say sola scriptura? There was no scripture.

[00:13:30]Abraham didn't have the Bible. How can you say sola scriptura when Abraham didn't even have scripture, etc., etc.? Those would be totally incoherent arguments. Obviously, they did n't have scripture. What we're saying when we talk about sola scriptura is This is what God has given us. And in fact, Scripture has given us Scripture in a special way, different from other gifts He has given us.

[00:14:07]Now, going back to the first century, not in any Protestant—I mean, I can't imagine any Protestant who would be there listening to Jesus, not reading something written in the Bible, but listening to Jesus, saying, "Well, Jesus, I don't know, this has to come from the Bible because we're only Scripture," and I don't see any Protestant who would say that.

[00:14:36]That is to say, in Protestantism, obviously, in the first century, we would accept this verbal teaching of Jesus, even of the apostles to a certain extent.

[00:15:02]Well, this is the third flaw, but I'm going to mention it as the second.

[00:15:11]We would obviously accept the unwritten teaching of the apostles, but only if it met these requirements of what Paul mentions—yes, Paul mentions in Galatians 1 and 2.

[00:15:27]You see? Even in Galatians 1 and 2, even in Paul, he says, "It's not that we can say whatever the Bible gives us." "Win." Galatians 1, if I teach any other message, anathema.

[00:15:43]You see how we know that message? Well, we have the Bible, we have the Scriptures to tell us if we are teaching right or wrong.

[00:15:54]And when Peter was teaching incorrectly in Galatians 2, Peter, Paul, didn't say, "Well, it's an apostolic teaching," he did n't say, "Uh, well, he's the Pope."

[00:16:13]He said, "Peter, you're wrong."

[00:16:18]And we don't know exactly what the debate was about, but I'm sure he was quoting scripture to Peter.

[00:16:28]Uh, so we'd be like Daddy, right? What did Papio say? from the end of the first century, beginning of the second century. He said, "I prefer to listen to people who really knew Jesus and his disciples." We would say the same. The problem is that we're living in the 21st century, or when the doctrine of sola scriptura was formulated and solidified?

[00:17:00]We're in the 10th century when we couldn't know the living voice of the witnesses of Jesus and his disciples.

[00:17:16]And the second mistake, which is actually the third mistake, is that he doesn't understand the implications of 2 Timothy 3. I'm going to share here—this is what many scholars use.

[00:17:40]Here I have the Reina-Valera 60, the Navarrese version, which is a Roman Catholic tradition, and the Greek in between. I'm going to read here from the Roman Catholic translation, but you—and this is what Paul is saying at the end of his life, okay? He's saying at the end of his life, " But you stand firm in what you have learned and believed, because you know from whom you learned it."

[00:18:10]It's interesting that he doesn't mention here, for example, the tradition.

[00:18:18]He says, "You have learned "Something."

[00:18:21]What is that something? Verse 15. From childhood you know not human tradition, not apostolic traditions, but the Holy Scriptures, which are able to make you wise for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus. And here we see the key part, passagrafi, okay? All Scripture is inspired or breathed out by God.

[00:18:56]Our argument as Protestants, the reason we defend Scripture, is because of this. The only text we have that is inspired, breathed out by God, is the Bible. There is no other text, no other office that enjoys this level of authority.

[00:19:18]And this is how the Apostolic Fathers spoke. For example, Clement, when he was writing on behalf of the church to another church in Corinth, he said, "I am not like Peter and Paul."

[00:19:31]He recognized the distance. There is no other text, nothing that comes close to saying this text is inspired by God, with God as the author.

[00:19:48]Now, there is a way in which we can say that this is inspired, but We would probably use the language of God's providence or the presence of the Spirit in us today, but not as inspired, as in writing Scripture.

[00:20:09][sighs] All Scripture is inspired by God and useful. For what purpose?

[00:20:15]To teach, to reason, to correct, to train in righteousness so that the man of God may be well-equipped for every good work.

[00:20:26]The question then is, what am I missing with the Bible? What am I missing? What are we missing as Christians? I have the Bible; I have everything necessary to teach, to reason, to correct, to train so that the man of God may be well- equipped for every good work.

[00:20:52]Uh, another flaw—I haven't put it here—but another flaw in logic, when one doesn't take into account the context and the development of history, is, for example, in Roman Catholicism, apostolic succession is essential, but apostolic succession hadn't yet occurred in the year 50, for example. In the year 50, apostolic succession didn't exist.

[00:21:29]The apostles were still alive, or so we can say In the year 33 or 34, 35, whenever.

[00:21:37]But there was a time when the apostles had not yet passed on their apostleship to others.

[00:21:50]For me, it would be ridiculous for Protestants to say, "Aha, Roman Catholics, there was no apostolic succession." It didn't exist.

[00:21:59]Therefore, the apostolic succession is erroneous.

[00:22:03]The very legitimate answer would be, [laughs] wait. [clears throat] He's coming, but wait.

[00:22:11]Uh, and it's the same argument or the same type of argument in response to this argument by Santi Alarcón.

[00:22:23]Well, scripture alone comes when we no longer have access to Jesus and the apostles and depend on the Bible. It is the only thing we have that comes from God, and it comes from God in a special way.

[00:22:40]The problem we have today is, what is the apostolic tradition that is not found in the Bible and how do we know that he is it?

[00:22:50]We have allusions or references to teachings that come from the apostles. But how do we know it comes from the apostles? How do we know it comes from Christ?

[00:23:01]As Protestants, we are not against apostolic teaching, we are not against unwritten teaching. The big question we have is how do we know that this really comes from the apostles?

[00:23:19]Well, uh, this is a short or brief response to this video I saw. I hope that both Protestants and Roman Catholics can recognize that this argument is not the end of sola scriptura.

[00:23:38]Well, if one wants to do away with writing alone, one has to understand the context of the 15th century and what was happening and why it was formulated, at least in that context, why was writing alone formulated?

[00:23:58]Also, answer 2 Timothy 3:14 or 15-17. What am I missing? Why do I need more? The Bible tells me that everything I need is there in the Bible.

[00:24:13]Why do I need more?

[00:24:16]Oh, and number three, what do we do when, for example, Pedro makes a mistake? What do we do? Do we follow him blindly or do we say, " You're wrong, Pablo"? That's what the Bible says.

[00:24:35]Okay, uh, quickly, let's see, I'm going to move on to the greetings and comments.

[00:24:41]Eh, Juven says, "They don't want to debate, but they do want to refute."

[00:24:46]Uh, well, yes to answer, but I hope this person, I don't know their name, can see that I don't want to do it with hate, I don't want to do it with caricatures. I don't want to do it with straw men.

[00:25:09]Uh, I want to, I'm willing to interact, but as Christians, I don't want to lie, I don't want to call, use names, okay? Um, I want to do it right, I want, well, as much as possible, for Christ to be present in me offering that answer.

[00:25:35]Ah, but I haven't used the word refute.

[00:25:38]Answer yes.

[00:25:41]Okay. Hey, Raúl Pérez says, "Greetings, brother, to you too. Hey, STM Peru, this is getting good. Greetings, brother Andrés, from the thrice-crowned city of kings, Lima, Peru. Greetings to you too. Hey, Eler, bad, misinformed. I don't know if I'm misinformed or the other one, but yes.

[00:26:03]STM Peru says, Santiago Alarcón was an evangelical who called himself a prophet in the church he attended.

[00:26:14]Furthermore, he himself confessed that he was baptized five times, was also a Oneness Pentecostal, etc., etc. Then he became Catholic. I do n't know Santiago. I hope he finds rest in Christ.

[00:26:31]And let me say this. I believe that Roman Catholics can find rest in Roman Catholicism. I know some believers in Roman Catholicism and I hope he finds rest in Christ.

[00:26:48]I hope he doesn't try to find rest in an institution or in the false belief that Roman Catholicism has all the answers and that all other traditions are sects and heretics. That's not the case. I too have suffered; I don't know if Santiago has suffered, but I suffered in my search for the truth, and in the end, I ended up in Reformed Catholicism.

[00:27:22]I believe it's the best tradition there is— not a perfect tradition, but I believe it's the best there is.

[00:27:30]Uh, but I hope he finds rest. I believe that if he finds rest, he'll stop attacking Protestants and using arguments like this. I hope he finds rest in Christ.

[00:27:48]That's right, Dr. Santi, he's misinformed. Okay, thanks for the clarification. [laughs] Uh, Saint Senin says, "Greetings from Ecuador, Doctor." Thank you for your work.

[00:27:57]YouTube's apologetics are cruel and ridiculous. Don't go in there. Greetings and my best thanks. "I don't want to go there."

[00:28:07]Uh, he says he doesn't do research, and this is difficult because academics do research and they 're not present on social media.

[00:28:18]People who are present on social media don't have the time or ability to do research.

[00:28:25]So it's for people who are actually looking for information. You rarely find it on YouTube. You can find it, but rarely. Much better to read a book, okay? Or go to a trusted academic on YouTube, okay? Because there's a lot of fluff on social media.

[00:28:52]Uh, what wins on social media is rhetoric. Someone saying very confidently, "There's no more writing alone." It's over.

[00:29:04]It's the end.

[00:29:07]Well, it's much better to read and think deeply and search with humility.

[00:29:15]Uh, every program that makes it destroy. Ah, maybe, maybe. José from Mexico, greetings to you too. Greetings to Ignacio Álvaro from Bolivia as well.

[00:29:28]Chemo says, "Greetings from Peru, waiting for my Roman Catholic to arrive." Well, I'm very glad. A hug to you too. He says, "If we say that it is the only infallible authority, how should we read sources that are not?"

[00:29:42]Good question.

[00:29:43]We as Protestants have levels of authority. Here we have the scriptures, below we have the ecumenical creeds, especially the Apostles', Nicene, and Athanasian creeds.

[00:29:56]Below them we have our confessions, the Salzburg confession, the 39 articles, the Spanish confession, our catechisms, and below that we have our own private interpretation. Okay, so we have levels of authority.

[00:30:21]The evangelical movement can be fairly criticized, that is, with reason, because it tends to remove those two intermediary sources between the Bible and the self.

[00:30:42]The evangelical movement must return to historical Protestantism and profess with the whole church, the ecumenical creeds and a historical confession.

[00:30:55]This is my advice to the evangelicals who are listening to me, who do not have a confession, who do not confess the creeds with the rest of the church.

[00:31:06][snort] Miguel Pérez, educate them, Andrés. Well, let's all learn together. That's the most important thing. Angel says, "Fraternal greetings to all. To you too.

[00:31:19]Chemo," says, "Brother, Brother Leonardo Chíico has a book, uh, tell your Catholic friend." Yes, it begins by saying that Rome as an institution strayed from the original meaning of the Scriptures, but that this differentiates us from sects.

[00:31:37]Uh, that's a topic for another podcast.

[00:31:39]Perhaps there will be time to answer it another time, but thank you for the question. Errison Mora says, "Only as a tool, but filtering everything through writing. If the tool contradicts writing, it is discarded." That's a good summary, though.

[00:31:59]Ah, another question. Let's see, [laughs] in Catholic apologetics books they point out the unambiguity of what it means to accept Christ in the heart and the new birth. What should we as evangelicals examine?

[00:32:14]Uh, well, I do n't know if I understand the question.

[00:32:20]Well, look, but anyway, I can tell you a couple of things. Accepting Christ into your heart is a modern expression that speaks of being born again, isn't it?

[00:32:36]Religiously speaking, let's say, the main sin is removing God as king in our hearts and sitting on that throne ourselves.

[00:32:52]So, when we invite Christ into our hearts, we are saying, "God, I don't want to be God, I want you to be my God." So, up to that point, I don't see anything wrong with the expression as long as we understand what we are saying.

[00:33:10]Okay. Uh, what else? Oscar Torres says, "God bless you greatly, my brother from Ciudad Juárez, to Chihuahua, Mexico."

[00:33:21]Thank you. Greetings to you too, Andrés.

[00:33:23]They don't want to talk, they want to destroy Protestantism.

[00:33:27]Okay, let's say, for the sake of the conversation, what is it you want to do? What does the Bible say? We shouldn't repay evil with evil, okay?

[00:33:36]We conquer evil with good, because that is how God conquered evil.

[00:33:42]God conquered evil with good.

[00:33:44]So if they want to treat us like that, we won't return evil for evil. When they speak ill of us, we bless.

[00:33:54]When they lie, we tell the truth. And I 'm not saying that all Roman Catholics lie, and I'm not saying that all Protestants tell the truth, but based on this comment, okay? Let's state the argument that they want to destroy Protestantism.

[00:34:15]That shouldn't affect our response. Our answer must find its roots in the scriptures.

[00:34:22]Oh, and by the way, we have a video coming out here in the next few weeks about why Protestantism is necessary.

[00:34:33]Protestantism has to exist for the good of the church. And well, you'll see the argument we came up with there.

[00:34:46]Okay, well, thank you. Not at all. What you are doing is what any true teacher would do: love, but with firmness. Okay, thank you very much.

[00:34:53]Uh, Wilson Benítez says, "Hello, dear brother Andrés, God bless you, it's a pleasure to be watching this analysis."

[00:34:59]Thank you. Jonathan Bogado says, "God bless you, brother Andrés." Thank you too. Uh, Luis says, uh, "Greetings from Guatemala. To you too." Samuel Castillo says, "Johnny, but Santi didn't exist in the first century, therefore, everything he says is irrelevant."

[00:35:19]Uh, okay. Uh, I'm not going to analyze that argument, uh, but Samuel also sends his greetings. Okay. Mark Madrigal says, "Do you think 1 Corinthians 4:6 can be a text we can use to defend sola scriptura?" I don't see many apologists using it. Okay, well, let's see. First Corinthians 4:6.

[00:35:51]Okay. The Navarrese abyss. These things, brothers, I have applied to myself and Apollos for your sake, so that we may learn not to go beyond what is written, so that no one may become arrogant in favor of one and against another. Ah, that's interesting, isn't it? Well yes. Henite tomerrapte. Already.

[00:36:17]Uh, maybe, maybe. That argument isn't bad, but you're right, I don't usually watch it. Uh, maybe.

[00:36:31]Thank you.

[00:36:34]Wilson says, "I think one problem with the approach to this debate is that Catholics demand that Protestants offer evidence or arguments that there are no other infallible sources. That may be. Uh, we have to, and this is difficult for everyone, but sometimes the other side, in this case Roman Catholics, they put the categories in place, and we think we have to respond within those categories, and sometimes we have to reject the categories and say, 'No, uh, I don't like it the way you've presented it to me.'" It's better to see it this way and offer other categories.

[00:37:23]That could be it.

[00:37:25]Eh, Juan Camonta says, "What Roman Catholics find difficult to understand is that we accept the oral tradition that was recorded in the scriptures." Indeed, tradition, the scriptures, that's how we Protestants understand oral tradition.

[00:37:46]Number one, oral tradition can do one of three things. Number one, you can repeat what's written, right? Paul can write Romans and then he can preach Romans, but he is repeating uh uh Romans.

[00:38:08]On the other hand, it may contradict the Scriptures.

[00:38:15]That's what we see, for example, I believe in Galatians 2, what Peter did and what Paul alludes to in Galatians 1.

[00:38:27]If I or an angel say anything else that is anathema, it is alluding to the possibility of a contradiction between the written [clears throat] and the spoken.

[00:38:40]But there is a third thing you can do. Here we have biblical teaching and oral tradition can complement it. Let me give you an example, and I don't want to debate this example, but I'll give you an example, okay?

[00:38:58]eh origins.

[00:39:00]Uh, in a very famous quote, he says that infant baptism dates back to the time of the apostles or the teaching of the apostles.

[00:39:14]No, that's debated, but it doesn't reiterate [clears throat] what the Bible says, it doesn't contradict what the Bible says, but rather complements it. That is where we Protestants could accept the teachings of Christ or the apostles.

[00:39:40]But I go back to what I said, how do we know that it really goes back to the apostles? It may be, it may be that there are tools that we can develop as a church to do that. And in fact, a couple of days ago I was talking to Daniel Eguiluz, an advisor for the Credo network, and he has also done several Credo Forums.

[00:40:09]And he was talking precisely about this, about how we can use the consensus of the fathers to arrive at apostolic teaching. And he and I are planning a book in which we have planned a chapter, a portion of a chapter, to talk about whether it is possible through the consensus of the fathers to arrive at apostolic teaching. We haven't done the research, so we'll see how it goes.

[00:40:42]Juan Ugal says, "Greetings, brother.

[00:40:44]Thank you very much and blessings to you as well.

[00:40:48]Okay." Wilson says, "I think from the Protestant side we assume that the Catholic will understand and move on to the argument with their other supposedly infallible sources apart from scripture, but they don't seem to do so." Okay.

[00:41:01]Raúl Pérez says, "I greatly admire the humility with which you explain things."

[00:41:06]Well, thank you.

[00:41:07]Eh, Joal says, "Dr. Mesmer, since writing is a methodological principle, asking for proof through writing is not a category mistake, just as self-proving should not be self-validating."

[00:41:26]Uh, I'm going back to what I said about 2 Timothy 3.

[00:41:36]The Bible—and that's just one passage, we could go to others—but the Bible presents itself as a book that comes from God. It obviously has a human author: Moses, David, Paul.

[00:41:55]But we would say that the final author is God, the final author of Clement's First Letter or Augustine's commentary on the psalms or the theological summa of Saint Thomas Aquinas.

[00:42:20]The final author is not the Holy Spirit, but that person. Now, that person is filled with the spirit, yes, but he is not an inspired author, what he is saying or writing is not an inspired text.

[00:42:38]Thus the Bible presents itself as a text with unique authority, because it has one author, one unique authorship.

[00:42:48]So I would probably start there.

[00:42:52][snort] Uh, says Miguel Pérez, "My brother, how can I begin to prepare myself in Protestant pedagogy? What path should I follow?" Well, uh, I encourage you to get Feiba.

[00:43:06]And now there are many seminaries where you can study, get a degree, a master's degree in theology in Spain, in other countries, the United States, many countries in South America, many ways. Uh, I am the rector of the theology seminary in Seville. Uh, there are many places where you can learn.

[00:43:32]Hey Juan Ugalde, your book is excellent, brother. Thank you, I'm very glad.

[00:43:37]And Josué Sánchez says, " Dr. Mesmer is a tremendous genius." Okay, well thank you very much. Uh, Jo says, "Thank you. Uh, so Dr. Mesmer is going to be doing live streams like this regularly. God bless you and your loved ones greatly. Thank you. Uh, no, uh, if you want to see more videos like this, uh, it's not that you have to send me videos, send us examples, uh, and if it's a video that I can use to teach, uh, great, but what I don't want to do is get into these fruitless debates, okay? If someone really has a question after watching a video, then send it to me and if we can incorporate it into the program, then we will.

[00:44:36]Alben from Karim Publications tells me, "Blessings, brother, to you too."

[00:44:40]José Flores says, "Greetings from Hidalgo, Mexico." I am Catholic, I have come to learn.

[00:44:45]God bless you for taking the time to talk about Christ. Thank you, José Flores.

[00:44:49]And our wish— well, I don't want to speak for others— but my wish, and I hope it's our wish, is that you rest in Christ. Christ is the center. Christ is everything. Oh, so God bless you too.

[00:45:12]Um, Erron More asks, what is the basis of papist apologetics given that the First Vatican Council recognizes us as Catholics?

[00:45:22]Um, I don't know because the official teaching of the Church is one thing, and from what I 've seen, many apologists, especially in the Hispanic world, are another.

[00:45:38]And it 's very interesting. It seems to me that in the Christian world, Hispanic countries seem to be much more traditionalist and much more resistant to Vatican I. They tend to take a much more rigid stance, probably due to historical reasons.

[00:46:10]In other languages, in other countries, it's not like that. In German, Roman Catholics and Lutherans have A much better relationship.

[00:46:23]In English, there tend to be better reactions.

[00:46:31]They exist in Spanish, but it's more difficult.

[00:46:36]Uh, it's something that Roman Catholics have to accept, especially online apologists; they have to accept that we are not heretics, that we are Catholic, but we are not Roman Catholic, and that we can support our arguments based on scripture and tradition.

[00:47:07]Uh, Luke Bader says, "Ignorance is its greatest expression." That's Protestantism."

[00:47:19]Well, uh, I don't know what he means. Uh, it's curious that historically some of the most intelligent people in the world have been Protestants. We can think, for example, of C.S. Lewes, who knew history, philosophy, literature very well, uh, and he was Protestant, he wasn't ignorant, and I could mention many more, but uh, okay.

[00:47:51]Roger Yan says, "Greetings, beloved brothers and friends. God bless you too."

[00:47:59]Javi says, "But tradition is also the word of God. The ultimate author is God. So, why would I be wrong? The question we have is, which tradition? That's the doubt we have.

[00:48:13]Which tradition is the word of God?

[00:48:16]Maybe they're using different terms than I am, but the question is, what is tradition?

[00:48:23]Okay, Luke says, okay, uh, the Bible was compiled and, by inspiration of the Holy Spirit, it was determined which books were the word of God. It was the Holy Catholic Church.

[00:48:37]Uh, well, I don't know if this sounds much more Protestant than Roman Catholic to me, because Roman Catholics often say that they can decide which books are canonical and which are not. Uh, and we say no. We determine, uh, we recognize the books that are inspired, and indeed, the Holy Catholic Church, to which we Protestants belong, but not the Holy Roman Catholic Church, which is not the same thing.

[00:49:17]Okay. This person says, "Blessings, working and listening to you too."

[00:49:22]Uh, which way do we pass it? Sorry for the inconvenience, sorry, I don't understand the context of this.

[00:49:29]Um, Alin from Publication says, "We have available in our catalog *Nicaea and the Trinity*, essays in celebration of the 1700th anniversary of the Council of Nicaea.

[00:49:38]Brother Dr. Andrew Mesmer is the general editor. Yes, and I encourage you to get the book to see our heritage as Catholics. Um, Dulce Sanchez says, "What do you think about the Lord's Day being Saturday?" That 's a question for another day. Um, please send us your questions to our email and we can have an episode where I can answer all of them.

[00:50:04]Ah, you guys, okay. Well, I'm not going to get into a debate about whether we're Catholic or not, but we are Catholic. Um, Roger says, "Catholic apologists have created their own sect; they don't even adhere to their own Magisterium, they say all sorts of things." Maybe. And be careful, because some Protestants do the same thing, but yes, it could be. Do you think the Pope would agree with online Catholic apologetics? Um, I don't think so, honestly. And I'm not saying That's not meant to be annoying. Uh, I honestly do n't think so. Okay, wrapping up. By the way, Césmar, speaking of the Holy Spirit, the Scriptures also mention in the first council that they decide, with the guidance of the Holy Spirit, what to do with the councils.

[00:50:49]Uh, well, I've already mentioned that, that we have layers of authority in our tradition and in the tradition of the church and in the Scriptures, that the only text we have that is inspired is the Scriptures, and the creeds are authoritative insofar as they correctly explain the Scriptures, and we affirm that they explain them well.

[00:51:17]Very well. Well, let's finish here.

[00:51:24]Thank you all for your comments, greetings, and encouragement. If you want to know more about us, you can find us on our website, follow us on social media, and see the content we have available on YouTube. We are the Credo Network. We encourage you to get this book, "Day by Day with the Spanish Reformers," and also the book " Faith and Life," because it will be a great blessing. You're going to like it a lot.

[00:51:54]Anyway, my name is Andrés Mesmer, we're the Credo network. See you in the next episode. Goodbye.

[00:52:06][music]