I now want to talk about the deuterocanon, which you call the apocrypha. Firstly,
I believe I must ask, where did you get the canon of your Bible from? I will
answer for you; you got it from the Catholic Church, and as previously
mentioned, from the Councils of Rome, Hippo, and Carthage. The decrees from
the Council of Carthage in 419 are the only ones which survive today, and they
include all 27 books of the New Testament, however, it also includes the Catholic
Old Testament; you can see it here: https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/3816.htm
(mind you, the Book of Baruch is included in Jeremiah, the books of Sirach and
Wisdom are included in the “Five Books of Solomon”). It is true that some people
had different views on the canon, such as St. Jerome, but after it was decreed,
they all humbled themselves and accepted the Church’s Council which was
guided by the Holy Spirit, as promised by Jesus. It is from the Church which we
derive our canon, and because of this, we need the Church to be unified.
Baptists, and especially the IFB, is not unified (as it is literally "independent"), and
thus, if they were in the 3rd-4th century, they would never be able to come up
with a canon which would be as universal as today, and it would be dependent on
the respective pastor's personal choice on which books to include. We know the
Church is the pillar of truth (1 Timothy 3:5), therefore the Church ought to be
visible, and not just an invisible collective of believers; we also knows this from
The Council of Jerusalem in Acts 15; there was unity in the early Church. How
would the Apostles have been able to make any decisions for the universal
Church (which is what "Catholic Church" means, for "Catholic" stems from the
Greek "katholikos," which means universal) if the Church was invisible, and just
a body of believers? Christ's Church is authoritative, which we know from
Matthew 16:18 and Matthew 18:18, as Jesus first gave St. Peter and then the
Apostles the ability to bind and loose in heaven. Binding and loosing is an ancient
Jewish term which means "to forbid by an indisputable authority and to permit
by an indisputable authority." Of course, using the congregational polity of the
IFB, such that the Church is only a bunch of believers with no head, it is
impossible to have any authority to bind and loose any faith or morals for the
Universal Church. We can also see the fruits of this manner of thinking; 
Protestantism is so divided, being made up of hundreds of denominations, while
the Catholic Church is a singular entity – an undivided Body of Christ.

The question which logically follows, what is the power structure which was left
to us? Essentially, St. Peter and the other Apostles set up Episcopates of Bishops;
for example, St. Peter started the Churches in Antioch and Rome (Rome being
where he died), St. Andrew started the Church in Constantinople, St. James the
Great started the Church in Jerusalem, St. Paul started the Church in Ephesus,
(and helped start in) Rome, Corinth, St. Mark (not an Apostle, but was told to by
St. Peter) started the Church in Alexandria, etc. All of these Churches have
Apostolic authority, but the Church in Rome has always been the head Church for
Christians; Our Lord built His Church on St. Peter. I know you will say that Peter
was only a “little rock,” but this is simply not true. In Matthew 16:18, Our Lord
changes St. Peter’s name from Simon to Peter, Peter being the literal word for
“rock.” You will say, that “petros” means “little rock,” but it is simply the
masculine form of the word “petras.” Furthermore, Jesus was speaking Aramaic,
and we know that “Peter” and “rock” are both “Keffa” in Aramaic. In Matthew
16, Jesus creates a Church on Earth, and models it after the Judaic government;
Jesus brought in the renewed and eternal Kingdom of David (2 Samuel 7:13). If
we want to follow Jesus fully, it would only make sense that we need to follow the
institutions He created. The hierarchy is as such:
1. Jesus is the King of the Jews (Mark 16:15),
2. St. Peter becomes the High Priest, similarly to the co-High Priest Zadok in 1
Chronicles 27:17, the prime minister of the Kingdom, and head of the Great
Assembly (the Great Assembly being an ancient assembly of scribes, prophets,
and sages from the 2nd Temple Period),
3. The 11 other Apostles take the roles of 11 other elders of the Great Assembly
(Nehemiah 7:7),
4. The 120 believers in Acts 1:15-28 take the roles of the 120 men of the Great
Assembly (Nehemiah 10:9-29), and St. Peter asserts his head when he assigns
Matthias to be an elder after Judas’s office is left vacant
In Matthew 16:18-19, the institution of a prime minister by Jesus of St. Peter, is
recorded; as previously said St. Peter was given the authority to bind and loose,
which means to have indisputable authority to permit and disallow. Flavius
Josephus, a 1st cenury Jew who is a secular source of the crucifixion of Jesus,
describes the ability of binding and loosing in his “The Jewish War” from the year
75AD, as:

“...real administrators of the state, at liberty to banish and to recall, to loose and
to bind, whom they would. In short, the enjoyments of royal authority were
theirs.”

Further, Our Lord draws a parallel in Matthew 16:18, where he mentions
binding and loosing, to Isaiah 22:19-24, which states:

19 And I will drive thee from thy station, and from thy state shall he pull thee 
down.
20 And it shall come to pass in that day, that I will call my servant Eliakim the
son of Hilkiah:
21 And I will clothe him with thy robe, and strengthen him with thy girdle, and I
will commit thy government into his hand: and he shall be a father to the
inhabitants of Jerusalem, and to the house of Judah.
22 And the key of the house of David will I lay upon his shoulder; so he shall
open, and none shall shut; and he shall shut, and none shall open.
23 And I will fasten him as a nail in a sure place; and he shall be for a glorious
throne to his father's house.
24 And they shall hang upon him all the glory of his father's house, the offspring
and the issue, all vessels of small quantity, from the vessels of cups, even to all
the vessels of flagons. (KJV)

God is speaking of Eliakim taking the position of the prime minister of the
Kingdom of David, and giving Eliakim keys to the house of David, similarly to
how Jesus gives St. Peter the keys to Heaven, the Eternal Kingdom, in Matthew
16:19. Jesus utilizes the imagery and language which the Father uses, such as
objects like rocks and nails, opening and shutting (binding and loosing).
Furthermore, looking at a paraphrased translation from 1st century BC Jews on
Isaiah 22, the Targum Jonathan:

“And I will place the key of the house of the Sanctuary, and the government of
the House of David, in his hand; and he shall open, and none shall shut; and he
shall shut, and none shall open. And I will appoint him a faithful chief-governor,
an officer in a firm place”

From this, we can see how the Jews viewed this passage and what the keys of the
kingdom meant; authority regarding both religiosity and governance of the
kingdom. Let us look at the similarities of Eliakim, the Prime Minister of the
Kingdom of David, and St. Peter:

1. Both are given keys; one of the old covenant, one to the old covenant
2. Eliakim’s keys have the ability to open and shut, while St. Peter’s have the
ability to bind and loose
3. Eliakim is a nail, which is susceptible to be broken, and St. Peter is a rock,
such that the Gates of Hell would never prevail
4. Eliakim’s role as Prime Minister is a successive role, which we know from how
he replaced Shebna in Isaiah 22:15-19
5. Eliakim’s role in the House of David was spiritual, as the keys given to him
were also those to the temple, as well as to the kingdom; therefore, they serve as
a prefigurement to the prime minister having special spiritual sovereignty of the
king, which in the case of the keys St. Peter was given, was the ultimate King,
Jesus.

There is also Luke 22:24-32, where Jesus prayed specifically for St. Peter, that
his faith would never fail (we know it is specifically to St. Peter from the Greek
grammar), and that his faith would only strengthen his brethren. 
Now, we know St. Peter was given special authority by Jesus to be the leader of
His Church, but how do we know that this authority was passed down to St.
Peter’s successors? Besides the fact it wouldn’t make sense for Jesus to ordain all
of these man, just for them to die and have no replacements. We know this from
numerous verses in the Bible, such as Romans 10:14-15, where St. Paul uses
the Greek word “apostalosin” for “sent,” which directly means only those who
have apostolic authority may have any authority. Similarly, in Titus 1:5, St. Paul
tells St. Titus to appoint elders with St. Paul’s authority; St. Paul tells St. Timothy
in 1 Timothy 5:22 to not be too hasty upon ordaining anybody; St. Paul reminds
St. Timothy of when he was ordained to the bishopric in 2 Timothy 1:6 – and we
know that the apostolic authority is in effect because when Jesus sends His
apostles out in John 20:21, the Greek word which is written for “send” is a
conjugation “apoststello,” which is the verb-form of the noun “apostolos,” which
means Apostle. Jesus sends His ministers with His authority. It is through this
Apostolic Authority, which is lent down from the Apostles’ successors, where we
find the current authority of the Pope, the other Patriarchs, and the Church as a
whole.

I believe that next, I need to clear up a few misconceptions of the Papacy. The
Papacy is not like the Mormon President, who can have random revelations at
any time, even if they contradict previous Church teaching. Rather, the Papal
Office, or rather who is residing in it at the time, is the Vicar of Christ on Earth.
Every word or opinion the Pope says or holds is not infallible, and furthermore,
we do not worship or follow the Pope; it’s a hierarchy, we submit to him and his
title which was given by Christ, but we only worship and follow Christ.

Moving on, we of course have historical references to the supremacy of the
Church in Rome, following from Apostolic Succession. Firstly, Pope St. Clement I
writes to the Corinthians, in about the year 80 (during this year, two apostles were
still living, St. Philip the Apostle and St. John), about an issue they were facing
with presbyters, saying:

Owing to the sudden and repeated calamities and misfortunes which have
befallen us, we must acknowledge that we have been somewhat tardy in turning
our attention to the matters in dispute among you, beloved; and especially that
abominable and unholy sedition, alien and foreign to the elect of God, which a
few rash and self-willed persons have inflamed to such madness that your
venerable and illustrious name, worthy to be loved by all men, has been greatly
defamed. . . . Accept our counsel and you will have nothing to regret. . . . If
anyone disobey the things which have been said by him [God] through us [i.e.,
that you must reinstate your leaders], let them know that they will involve
themselves in transgression and in no small danger. . . . You will afford us joy and
gladness if being obedient to the things which we have written through the Holy
Spirit, you will root out the wicked passion of jealousy.
We can see here how Pope St. Clement asserts his authority, saying “Accept our
counsel and you will have nothing to regret,” and “If anyone disobey the things 
which have been said by him through us, let them know that they will involve
themselves in transgression and in no small danger.” Also from this, we can see
how in the very early Church, it was never truly independent, as the Church in
Corinth had issues settled by the Church in Rome; would this ever happen with,
lets say, your Church and another Independent Baptist Church, let alone
an Independent Baptist Church thousands of miles away? Well, that is simply
unthinkable!

To mention St. Irenaeus once more, who is rather explicit, he states in his
book Against Heresies:

But since it would be too long to enumerate in such a volume as this the
succession of all the churches, we shall confound all those who, in whatever
manner, whether through self-satisfaction or vainglory, or through blindness and
wicked opinion, assemble other than where it is proper, by pointing out here the
successions of the bishops of the greatest and most ancient church known to all,
founded and organized at Rome by the two most glorious apostles, Peter and
Paul, that church which has the tradition and the faith which comes down to us
after having been announced to men by the apostles. With that church, because
of its superior origin, all the churches must agree, that is, all the faithful in the
whole world, and it is in her that the faithful everywhere have maintained the
apostolic tradition.