The channel "Ready to Harvest" is one of the best resources on KZread for learning about differences between denominations.

Man I have been watching a lot of Mike Winger and it would be such a blessing to see Gavin and Mike have a discussion like this. Especially with Mike being such a large Evangelical Channel with an utter wealth of Gospel knowledge I would love to see how they interact and how they can discuss their differences. God bless Gavin and Mike for their contribution to the Protestant "internet revival".

@JosiahTheSiah

Жыл бұрын

💯 these two guys could actually show us how to have a gracious discussion about Calvinism

@thomasc9036

Жыл бұрын

If I remember correctly, Mike Winger is a pastor of Calvary Church. They may have similar views on some but I doubt their theologies will match well. It will be more of a debate...

@yannibelousov3204

Жыл бұрын

@@thomasc9036 Gavin is Baptist and Calvary is more Pentecostal but primarily Evangelical, but it doesn't seem to far removed from the baptist origins, I think that they have a lot of similar thoughts on things, and while yes they have disagreements both of them seem to be very gracious and forward thinking to unification and discussion. I doubt it would be a debate, especially with Mike explaining how much he dislikes doing debates, and Gavin always being open to hearing new perspectives

@thomasc9036

Жыл бұрын

@@yannibelousov3204 That will depend on the topic to avoid being a debate. Gavin is a reformed Baptist and he focuses quite a bit on historical Protestantism. Winger is from an offshoot of Pentecostalism. Winger is a more pietistic approach rather than a scholarly and historical one like Gavin. It will be hard to find a common topic.

@yannibelousov3204

Жыл бұрын

@@thomasc9036 I would disagree with Mike being more pietic than scholarly. Mike has done a profound amount of scholarly work for his videos, especially those dealing with other religions like his "contending for the faith" series. He often goes back to classical protestant sources and commentaries for information to further his faith and preaching. He definitely has a "faith and truth over feelings" mentality. Mike is more fundamentalist than Gavin which is both good and bad but idk I believe a discussion about their similarities and differences especially in the context of evangelical and mainline protestantism could be cool.

I recently left a PC-USA congregation, where the church service was very traditional, but the Bible class was not. Instead of the Bible, we were absorbing books on social justice and white privilege. However, the clincher was when we were assigned to read, “The Universal Christ,” by Richard Rohr. That was my cue to jump ship.

@Mikolaj_Kapusta

Жыл бұрын

Genuine question: If you "jumped ship", then who is going to correct them now?

@LucasSheldon

Жыл бұрын

@@Mikolaj_Kapusta I can imagine it may depend on how much influence he has in the church. If he's a Presbyter or someone with influence in the church, then perhaps he could take a stand. But if this is the kind of stuff the leadership is approving, it may be best to just be a light to those whom he knew personally that may inquire about why he left the church.

@toughbiblepassages9082

Жыл бұрын

@@Mikolaj_Kapusta the Christian has to have sharp wisdom to know when it is time to stay and fight and when it is time to leave.. each case is different, and elder’s definitely have a heavier responsibility to stay and defend the flock.. but even Jesus taught that there comes a time to shake the dust off your sandals as a testimony against them. I went to a pcusa church, where the woman pastor prayed to God in gender neutral terms and referred to Christians who are stuck in the body they don’t “biologically identify with”… I can’t go back to that.. that’s beyond being corrected imho. I say that being very very sympathetic towards the desire to stay united through differences.

@Mikolaj_Kapusta

Жыл бұрын

@@toughbiblepassages9082 Wow, I'm really sorry for what you are coming through. I'm from Poland and to me such things are unthinkable. We haven't been hit by that yet.

@prolifefilm8127

Жыл бұрын

Can you expect unity without authority? Does love mean tolerance? Or does real love limit tolerance?

As a Catholic I loved this talk , there gorgeous old Protestant church’s that are now museums or restaurants and it’s sad , God Bless

oh nice! I have been watching Redeemed Zoomer build a church building in minecraft and mostly love his stuff! Great to see him on here.

Redeemed Zoomer is in the big leagues now. Bonkers.

Rev. Ortlund, one environment I've experienced where many denominational differences have to be put aside is inside prison walls. I've been involved in Christian prison fellowship for nearly 20 years and when believers have one choice for gathering in the Lord's name, they have two choices: go and fellowship with brothers in Christ, or avoid. Not that there are never challenges when some old tropes rear their ugly heads, but when such things occur, patient and loving--but truthful--response typically overcomes. Keep up the good work. I continue to learn more about my own faith tradition with every post.

So happy to see these two have a dialogue finally!

Great video! I loved the constructive comparisons between mainline and evangelical denominations. I agree with that we can, and should, learn from each other. As a low-church Evangelical (broadly speaking), I've gotten more interested in church history and liturgy over last few years. This channel is so helpful in making me a historically grounded protestant. 😊 Also, BIG props to Redeemed Zoomer for writing his own 95 theses!

@redeemedzoomery6053 and @truthunites I love all the names being discussed in this conversation, so I can look them up myself! Even as a Catholic Christian myself, I know that Jesus is working through all of our "churches" to bring about his Kingdom and Will on Earth! Blessings to the both of you two!

As an Orthodox, I am glad you are both at least consistent in your belief in Sola Fide. Some Protestants seem to argue salvation comes from affirming the doctrine of faith alone not from faith itself.

Books recommended 15:22 The Principle of Protestantism (1845) by Phillips Schaff The Mystical Presence by John Williamson Mevin

Never thought I'd see Redeemed Zoomer on here. Love both you guys!

I love it, am a fan of both Redeemed Zoomer (and his Kingdom Craft) and Dr. Ortlund, very cool to hear and witness this dialogue.

I admire Redeemed Zoomer’s stance. I grew up in the ELCA and moved cities, all of the ELCA churches here are beyond lost, so i decided to convert to LCMS. I hope he’s right, but the seminaries of the mainline are lost. And that’s where so much of the doctrine in the mainline comes from. I hope he’s right and I’m wrong, but my hope is low.

@hanssvineklev648

Жыл бұрын

@andya7012. I also grew up ELCA, and I think you’re right on the money. In fact, I don’t happen to believe the mainlines have anything at all to contribute to Christendom as a whole. They’re heretical; they’re apostate; they’re ahistorical; they have no real ties to Christianity. I have no desire to dialogue with them, associate with them, or even think about them. None whatsoever.

@toughbiblepassages9082

Жыл бұрын

The PCUSA is pretty bad…. but the ELCA is straight up demonic. Those ELCA buildings are bastions of perversion. That “denomination” is too far gone imho.

Great to see His face for the first time. His channel has been a great help to the Church.

Not a dialogue I ever thought we’d get, but looking forward to it!

Went to a Church of England service recently (UK vacation). It was gut wrenching having a prayer of apology to "Mother Earth". Sick feeling in my gut (thank you Holy Spirit!!). And all I could think was "man can not serve God and mammon". Thanks for your content. Makes me think.

This is great! Exactly what I needed!

Great video!

Thank you both for the much needed discussion on this topic 😊💯

Both the LCMS and the SBC are examples to the contrary of liberals breaking from the original orthodox denomination. Granted, in both cases, sometimes the ejectioning of questionably progressive contingents can result in a less than desirable "further right than traditional" finality, or put another way, the necessary booting of liberals can make otherwise orthodox Churches fully fall into a pattern of fundamentalism -- which is equally undesired. Even more optimal splits can have unpleasant outcomes. Now, I say that as someone who definitely agrees with Redeemed Zoomer on the principle of concern in this project. Just a small correction.

Great conversation. I'm pretty amazed that RZ knows and loves Nevin but didn't know Schaff! Anyway, he's young and has plenty of time to read Schaff.

Gavin As an aside , I would love for you to do a video or series of videos of historical Baptist retrieval … it’s liturgy, confessions , traditions, vestments .. etc . I think to often we assume that the Baptist tradition is void of these same elements we see in Roman Catholicism and within the Magisterial Protestant Traditions

I like Zoomer's mission a lot and I wish him well. One thing I don't think he's fully taking into account, though, is that these people are teaching your kids.

Really appreciated and strongly agreed with the sentiment about being historically rooted. There simply is a severe gap in the labor done here. It hasn’t been developed to its best, I don’t think-especially the connection to the historical confessions, creeds and not just the early church but the medieval as well. Our historical roots are anemic and we need more scholarship in this area. But I don’t think being confessional is at odds with retaining open membership under something less specific (which is a tough thing to decide on) such as the apostles or Nicene creed because whatever you make as confessionally binding you make as an article of faith for salvation. Obviously a church covenant usually serves to mend these two together.

I'm a former PCUSA ordination candidate, now ECO, and graduated from a historic PCUSA seminary. I commend RZ's zeal for restoring the mainline denoms, but it's foolish, to be perfectly honest. Ever since the large majority of orthodox believers exited the PCUSA (either for ECO or EPC) over the past ten years, the liberals and revisionists have no check, no balance. They hold full sway. The "Fellowship" (those who decided to stay) has zero influence and are barely tolerated. Conformity to the sex/gender revolution is de facto and eventually will be de jure.

@redeemedzoomer6053

Жыл бұрын

well that's why I think it was the wrong decision for the orthodox people to leave!

@rockpaperscissors82

Жыл бұрын

And it makes zero sense for evangelicals to join mainline churches that they may not be "comfortable" with joining. The obvious reason is that these churches, by and large, are compromised on basic doctrines, not least on gender and sexuality.

@rockpaperscissors82

Жыл бұрын

@@redeemedzoomer6053 But what's happened has happened. Our church left for ECO because we knew that it would be near impossible to find an orthodox/evangelical pastor in the next 10-20 years if we remained in the PCUSA. And that is obviously true. Even "moderate" seminaries like Union in Richmond are fully LGBTQ and radical liberation theology-affirming institutions, especially with all of their recent faculty hires.

@redeemedzoomer6053

Жыл бұрын

@@rockpaperscissors82 dang. Did you at least keep your building?

@rockpaperscissors82

Жыл бұрын

@@redeemedzoomer6053 Yes. 96% voted to leave.

I love this convo! Zoomer’s idealism is admirable. My biggest hesitation is, if a little leaven leavens the whole lump, there’s a lot in these mainline churches that can send people to hell. Could I raise my kids in a church like that? Hmm 🤔

@Bradford.C.Wallsbury

Ай бұрын

This is why I can't stand with his "reconquista" - it's all good and well for passionate, educated young men to try to "clean out" these lost liberal churches, but in that in between period, think of the souls being lost into heresy. And exactly, can you even trust your child with the Sunday school teacher? It seems like a minor detail but it becomes big when you are part of a church's life

@NomosCharis

Ай бұрын

@@Bradford.C.Wallsbury maybe it’s a special calling for single ppl or married couples with no kids? 🤷‍♂️

Gavin, how much time do you devote to reading per week? What tips do you have for reading and retaining well? Any tips for speed specifically? How much of your reading is work vs. recreation? Thanks!

At the 15min mark RZ asks a GREAT question!! "Why do you think Protestantism is seen as not having historic roots?" Boy howdy!! Is that question that I could talk about for a LONG time! There are SO MANY things I could point to. One could probably write a book with 15 chapters or more on the 15 reasons or more that is the case. I'll just give two. 1) Church History as NOT been taught which is why the VAST MAJORITY are CLUELESS as to what the faith once delivered for all to the saints is. 2) Easy-Believism/Seeker-Sensitive MAN-Centered theology and its false gospel. In short, there's so much emphasis today on getting your Sunday pep talk and if there is Sunday School it's on "How To Have Your Best Life Now" than "How To Know WHY You Believe What You Believe".

I definitely am with you on the idea of not splitting up/leaving for trivial reasons. However, I don't think we have to go back to forms of the past in order to learn from history or grow in our connection to the historical church. For example, I am currently reading Augustine (on your recommendation - thank you!) but I don't think I need to start an Augustinian church. I see denominations like the bronze serpent in the wilderness - the forms of each were powerfully used of God in their time, but at the wrong time, the very same forms can be stumbling blocks to God's people. Rather than assuming that what God is doing will always look the same outwardly, I want to be free to learn from all historical time periods but be bound by none, and fully available to whatever work God is doing today.

from what I've noticed on fracturing mailine churches it is to do with an influx of the culture to the degree that sin is being recognized and even celebrated as godly--mainly via the LGBT and the feminist movement. And I am in a pca presby. have also been in baptist when I have moved to various area. I'm also continuationist. I feel there has to be a belief in scripture without trying to change it.

I couldn’t help but laugh at Gavin’s facial expression, when the other host referred to John MacArthur as “POPE MacArthur”!🤣 But, in all seriousness, a massive schism has developed into a chasm, when leaders, pastors, and scholars slander one another and make personal attacks! This is reminiscent of the Pharisees! I found it not only repugnant, but down right heartless, and UNCHRISTIAN, when MacArthur and his acolytes condemn, or worse…anathematize other Christians - even in their own tradition/church. I can only speculate how they respond to non-Christians…our fellow neighbours…concerning the 2nd greatest commandment we are to obey. Yet, what sincerely disturbed me, was when MacArthur turned on a good friend. Many here are well acquainted with DR. TIM KELLER. Recently, MacArthur said many unkind, unjust, and incorrect things about his now, FORMER friend, Dr. Keller. If MacArthur (and the millions of seminary students, pastors, and deacons he leads and teaches in his seminary) follow his examples, rants and demonstrations on how to treat our friends and fellow Christians…as representative of how to be an HUMBLE, CHRIST-LIKE follower??? That is certainly NOT Biblically affirming behaviour…nor the kind of Christian I strive to be! Even though, Dr. Keller is not of my tradition - I respect the man both as a scholar and Christian! For a man living with stage 4 Pancreatic cancer…he has been very tolerant and gracious in dealing with MacArthur’s statements about him! To me, these are signs of a good leader/pastor, and a Godly man! As much as I agree with Gavin, I am exceptionally grateful in how he stresses the importance of HUMILITY, as evidenced in his videos! He has always been gracious, kind, and respectful towards all peoples - regardless of format (ie: debate/commentary). Wishing everyone a wonderful day!🇨🇦☺🇨🇦

13:34 - 13:59 “Where do you draw the line between things that are ok to disagree on and things that are not ok to disagree on. I think you need some sort of objective standard.” How does this square with Sola Scriptura and the perspicuity of Scripture?

Redeemed Zoomer has a face?

have either of you attended a Mercersburg Liturgy? if you know of a congregation (probably UCC) which worships according to this Reformed liturgy, please post information. i can't even find the order of service published anywhere.

Can someone tell me a place where I can read Richard Hooker's work? I don't have hundreds of dollars to spend on books lol.

Gavin, I wish you had been more forthright when you pressed about when it is ok to leave a denomination. I think the point to leave is when the church teaches that should be affirmed. It is bad enough to ignore certain sins, but when sins of homosexualiry, female pastors, or transgenderism are affirmed, it is tome to leave.

Excellent video! Random question, Dr. Ortlund: is First Baptist Ojai part of any particular Baptist denomination?

@mj6493

Жыл бұрын

American Baptist Churches USA

Gavin, can you explain why/how the Catholic Church doesn’t reform? It seems to me that a major point in this video is this “always reforming” norm within Protestantism as if the Apostolic churches can’t/don’t reform? As always, really enjoy your videos. God Bless!

@davids7646

Жыл бұрын

to reform means to admit their one true church can err. that is not the common view of catholics at all.

@isaiahwhitehead777

Жыл бұрын

@@davids7646 But they have admitted err on the pre reformation practice of indulgences, they kept the theology but made it harder for it be merely transactional. A comparison may be moving from one mode of baptism(sprinkling) to another(submersion) where the theology of baptism is kept but the mode/practice was reformed. Another example would be saying they were wrong for sending the crusades or reforming their view of democracy or science. There would only be a small subset of beliefs that have definitive rulings that could not be reformed by the church (i.e. the Trinity, nature of Christ, etc.); so it still leaves open the question of why there is this perspective of the catholic church not reforming?

Your "first stab" was the most lethal blow. I would love to have unity with other denominations like Catholicism and Orthodoxy, but they need to recognize us as part of the Church too. It always feels like double-talk whenever a Catholic says they support unity with Protestants, and then goes off and excludes them from being a part of the Church Jesus established. Don't include us in word and exclude us in deed and behavior. The first ten minutes of this video was all around solid material, and had me instantly hooked.

@gandalfthegreatestwizard7275

Жыл бұрын

That's true. Though the Second Vatican Council did recognize spiritual fruits among Protestants and considered them to be members of the body of Christ. It's a case of the typical Catholic mentality not having caught up with the teaching of the bishops.

@foodforthought8308

Жыл бұрын

I feel close unity with my Catholic brothers in Christ!

@keith8325

Жыл бұрын

It was the loving catholic view toward Protestants as "separated brethren " that began my switch from Presbyterian to RC in 1988. In contrast, the local Protestant pastor's referred to JPII's visit to the USA with much vitriol. The fact is that the Reformers removed themselves from authority and chaos set in. Luther himself lamented the discord and fracture he was witnessing since his "95" were posted. The divorce analogy leaving both parties diminished is the reason "God hates divorce ". Marriage is inseparable and so is the one body of Christ. Just as divorce shouldn't be thinkable, so too the Protestant reformation.

At 12:00 you say that Luther says the Papal church IS a true church, but how does that square with Luther also saying that sola fide is the article upon which the church stands or falls? I can understand East Orthodox not having a clear understanding.. but Catholic history DOES understand what sola fide is and rejected it.. was Luther wrong that she failed to be a church when she did that? Or is the official Roman Catholic institution no longer a real church? I’d be very interested in some feedback on this

13:58 We need some sort of objective standard. Like the creed 1) One - ONE 2) Holy - Consecrated to God 3) Catholic - Universal 4) Apostolic - successor of authority

@catkat740

Жыл бұрын

😂I said that too!!!

How does one form his conscience?

Hey Gavin could you make a video on ecumenism? It concerns me that his is deemed a heretical teaching and j would like to know your thoughts on it

@thomasc9036

Жыл бұрын

Who is he in "his is deemed a heretical"?

@andygarcia2113

Жыл бұрын

@@thomasc9036 sorry I mean it the doctrine it self is considered heretical

Re: Is Protestantism historically rooted ? I cannot think of one critic (of Protestantism) who points to the lack of adherence to post-Reformation confessions as evidence of Protestantism's "lack of historic roots" (in the early church). Would love for Redeemed Zoomer to back that claim up.

Differences are fine but the mainline protestants should have a council to come together and agree on the core beliefs and have different rites instead of denominations. The many options have given me such heartache and ecclesiastical anxiety growing up. This is one of the reasons I look to Orthodoxy. They understand this.

I like RZ's enthusiasm and dream. However, I compare it to Communism. In a capitalistic nation, you can have multiple political parties. In a communist nation, there is only ONE political party. In Christian liberalism, you are allowed to have different positions as long as your position matches liberalism. 🙂

An orchestra is in unity but they don't do all the same thing, or even play the same notes. I think we need to understand what unity means from God's perspective

@davids7646

Жыл бұрын

not a correct analogy i dont think but good try

One of the ways RC and EO maintain historicity is the use of "saints". Commonly, Saints are spiritual ancestors. How many Protestant churches talk about historic "saints"? We barely hear about Reformers.

@HearGodsWord

Жыл бұрын

In my experience its the opposite. We're always hearing about Christian brothers from the past.

Redeemed boomer looks like a younger Cameron Bertuzzi.

As a pentecostal, Oneness Pentecostals are another of those boundary marks

38:00 - does the Westminister confession commit me to a Calvinist interpretation of scripture? If so then my fingers are crossed 😜

As a former protestant and now Orthodox Christian. It is sad to see brethren rationalize,justify, and outright consider themselves an authority on an issue that is heretical. The mere notion of well I like to practice my faith my own way and look at all my "rational justifications I have." In the Orthodox church, we always pray for unity of the faith.What Gavin and the Zoomer are promoting is an invisible Christian community with no tangibles and at best disconnected church Islands. We have seen what happens to schisms throughout church history. They rise and fall as they should. I pray for both of these brethren, whose authority is a book (unfortunately, that is what protestantism has turned holy scripture into), not Christ and his Church. In summary, if I was considering protestantism , which of the buffet options is the right one and why. Basic question in protestantism this will generate countless answers and interpretations that lead back to an individual, not a church.

Are Protestants really going to say that St John Fisher was a ravenous wolf? That’s what it sounds like they are saying to Catholics like myself. The Orthodox Church of the Internet denies the sainthood of John Fisher, and they do not agree among themselves concerning the validity of his baptism. Where do Protestants stand?

So, are quakers true Christians? They don't get baptized.

Redeemed zoomer looks like my brother in that pic.

Sectarianism and division in Christianity is to stressful and disappointing to me … I came to the gospel about two years ago and I’ve grown a lot in knowledge of different things concerning Christianity and the Church itself, and the more I know and perceive about the reality of the christian faith the more weary and unmotivated I become towards uniting the faith. I don’t lose hope, but I think Christianity has become a different religion than what it is called to be… Nevertheless, the mainline churches of Christ (although not considered part of protestantism neither a denomination) have achieved a lot of unity in both historical roots of Christianity and evangelism in a modern world. It is worth noting though, that there is a lot of division within the mainline churches of Christ, but concerning the purity and simpleness of devotion to Christ I have come to be convinced that this kind of christian living and worship achieves in some big way the goal of going back to the Scriptures and to be one single Body again - the Body of Christ - without falling in the pot of lacking knowledge of eclesial history.

As one who practices in the “Protestant” tradition-the word is in quotes because I think the title is misleading and doesn’t characterize the tradition accurately-I would say that a significant reason people don’t view it as historically rooted is because of the adoption of modern technology and practices of the modern world. Though I still practice in a Protestant tradition, I have been very attracted to orthodoxy and Roman Catholicism in the last two years because it seems so unchanged for millennia. When I went to the Catholic mass recently, the quietness of it all seemed so reverent. There wasn’t a rock band or flashing lights or smoke machines. There weren’t televisions or QR codes. It was slowly paced. The acállela singing was beautiful. It was so refreshing. In my mind, Protestant was synonymous with modernity. In fact, I was very pleasantly surprised to learn that the Lutheran tradition was very similar to Roman Catholicism in its liturgy! I would strongly suggest that technology IS the reasons most people don’t find it a historically rooted tradition in the west. How could they, when they technology utilized has only been around for 100 years?

Damnnn

I just can’t understand why you’d want to go to a church that isn’t sure it is the church Christ established? Why is Protestant “honesty” about being fallible, a good thing? On what basis would anyone be able to trust the teachings they are taught? Scripture? Ok but who’s interpretation and what authority do they have? Legit questions from a lifelong Protestant here.

You guys are great, wonderful discussion and obviously you have a heart for the Lord. In the gentlest way possible, I would like to point out that at the heart of protestantism is the spirit of progressivism. The reformers made it clear that their argument was not that they were right, but rather that no one could be possibly definitively authoritatively infallibly right when it came to the question of orthodoxy. The fractal nature of protestantism is a feature not a bug.

@HearGodsWord

Жыл бұрын

The Reformers were looking to bring the church back by looking to the Bible and church fathers, which is the opposite of being progressive

Point to Jesus!!! Point to Jesus!!!!

"Confessional on paper" I would say although us Protestants disagree with some of the Catholic Confessional doctrine they have the same problem, they have unity on paper but in actual fact practically they are largely a mess under Francis and the "magisterium ".

May 4th 2023. In a couple of days’ time, one well-known Protestant will be affirming his belief in the Protestant Religion in the presence of another man’s wife, whom he will represent to be now his own wife. What should Christians make of this?

@HearGodsWord

Жыл бұрын

She is his wife, thats what Christians make of it. 🥱

@david_porthouse

Жыл бұрын

@@HearGodsWord So Jesus got it wrong about divorce?

@HearGodsWord

Жыл бұрын

@@david_porthouse either Jesus is wrong or you're wrong. The answer to that is simple. 🤣

@david_porthouse

Жыл бұрын

@@HearGodsWord Jesus equated divorce with adultery.

@HearGodsWord

Жыл бұрын

@@david_porthouse the church doesn't control who gets married in England, so you're making another moot point.

Wouldn't Protestant just be a fancy word for Christian?

42:58 “Every split has been the conservatives leaving”. One exception: Missouri Synod. The Semimex liberals left

I'm universalist, and I don't think for one minute that it doesn't matter if you're this or that. No, it is the work of the church to bring about the spiritual state of things where all knees freely will bow. We will in the end prevail over the gates of hell itself and bring everyone out of there.

@MortenBendiksen

Жыл бұрын

I'd just add that it is really the work of Christ that accomplished this, and it is our privilege as Christians to allow ourselves to be his limbs in bringing this reality to everyone.

@thomasc9036

Жыл бұрын

We call that theological liberalism.

@HearGodsWord

Жыл бұрын

​@@thomasc9036 yep 👍

@maleyyoung

Жыл бұрын

Ephesians 3:10 10 so that through the church the manifold wisdom of God might now be made known to the rulers and authorities in the heavenly places. 10 God's purpose in all this was to use the church to display his wisdom in its rich variety to all the unseen rulers and authorities in the heavenly places.

It’s Jesus and Him crucified! 1 Corinthians 2:2

The Epistle of Saint Ignatius to the Trallians Chapter 2. Be subject to the bishop, etc For, since you are subject to the bishop as to Jesus Christ, you appear to me to live not after the manner of men, but according to Jesus Christ, who died for us, in order, by believing in His death, you may escape from death. It is therefore necessary that, as you indeed do, so without the bishop you should do nothing, but should also be subject to the presbytery, as to the apostle of Jesus Christ, who is our hope, in whom, if we live, we shall [at last] be found. It is fitting also that the deacons, as being [the ministers] of the mysteries of Jesus Christ, should in every respect be pleasing to all. For they are not ministers of meat and drink, but servants of the Church of God. They are bound, therefore, to avoid all grounds of accusation [against them], as they would do fire. Chapter 3. Honour the deacons, etc In like manner, let all reverence the deacons as an appointment of Jesus Christ, and the bishop as Jesus Christ, who is the Son of the Father, and the presbyters as the sanhedrim of God, and assembly of the apostles. Apart from these, there is no Church. Concerning all this, I am persuaded that you are of the same opinion. For I have received the manifestation of your love, and still have it with me, in your bishop, whose very appearance is highly instructive, and his meekness of itself a power; whom I imagine even the ungodly must reverence, seeing they are also pleased that I do not spare myself. But shall I, when permitted to write on this point, reach such a height of self-esteem, that though being a condemned man, I should issue commands to you as if I were an apostle?

@HisLivingStone241

Жыл бұрын

Ignatius' letter is evidence against Apostolic succession and is evidence that Bishop Ignatius himself did not consider himself to have any claims approaching Apostolic authority. The only positive claim here is for a certain Church government, but Ignatius gives no reason it is of divine right.

@sergioayala4379

Жыл бұрын

@@HisLivingStone241 Saint Ignatius of Antioch is the Third Bishop of Antioch and Successor of Saint Peter the First Bishop of Antioch. His Epistle to the Traillians he clearly states that Without the Bishop there is No Church. He also Warns against the Poison of Those that are dissenting from this practice.

@HisLivingStone241

Жыл бұрын

@Sergio Ayala and Clement showcases that there was no three office view of Church government (Bishop, Prebyster, Deacon) in the first century. So Ignatius is not claiming the three office view is of divine right. To claim otherwise is to argue outside of history and assume making a claim on the visible Church is the same as making divine dogma for all time.

@sergioayala4379

Жыл бұрын

@@HisLivingStone241 Saint Ignatius was a Disciple of The Apostle and Evangelist Saint John. His words would carry more weight in that he is Successor to two Apostles.

@HisLivingStone241

Жыл бұрын

@Sergio Ayala So? I am arguing from historical context, you are arguing from theological assumptions

Ameeucan evangelical denominations risk being a bit like Christian fast food franchises...

While I agree with the spirit of what Gavin and RZ say regarding the difference between heresy and heterodoxy, I disagree with their conclusion for the following reasons: 1) First and foremost the Catholics have a different gospel. They pronounced 151 anathemas upon all Protestants and thereby condemned themselves. (Gal. 1:8-9, Matt. 7:2) How can you call some a Brother who holds a curse on you? 2) By their definition a JW, Mormon, Muslim, and Jew for that matter could claim to be Christian. They will all tell you they worship the same God we do. To be clear, it is possible for a Catholic to be a Christian. There are Biblically ignorant Catholics just as there are Biblically Protestants. A Catholic may call themselves Catholic and be totally ignorant of what the Bible says and even the the RCC teaches. And if you doubt that a Catholic doesn't consider you their Brother just go to a Mass and try to partake in the Lord's Table/Communion. Wrt Luther & Calvin's quotes, when were they made? I suspect it was before the Council of Trent and it's edicts. And they were most certainly before Vatican II. It is well-known that Luther was a Catholic Priest and his nailed the 95 theses to the Wittenberg church doors was not a sign of his departure but rather a request for open dialogue and debate. So it is no surprise that he would call them Brothers then. BUT would he NOW?!

Bless his heart. Such an idealized and yet misguided young man. He blames the conservatives for leaving churches that were apostating ... and he stays in the PC-USA. After the UCC, I think the PC-USA is about as apostate a denomination as there is. When Christ commissioned the apostles, he told them that where they were not welcomed, to shake the dust from their feet and move on. He did not say to stick around and keep fellowship with them until those who disagreed with you died out. I came out of the Episcopal church because there was no staying any more. I tried for years in hopes that things would get better, but they didn't. He speaks more harshly about the orthodox protestants than the heretics. And I find it amusing that he's faulting Protestants for splitting. Splitting is in our DNA. It's what we've done from the beginning. I really hoped for something much better from this discussion. And United Churches are ALWAYS compromised churches. Guys, study this stuff before you talk.

@gandalfthegreatestwizard7275

Жыл бұрын

Splitting may be in the DNA of Protestants, but that is a bug, not a feature. "Shaking the dust from your feet" refers to reception by non-Christians, not separating from other Christians. Schism is opposed to the unity that the Lord wants, and an obstacle to the Gospel.

The Catholic Church doesn't recognize denominations. There are Protestant ecclesial communities that have Baptized Christians. A Church, in the proper sense, has the Sacraments and priests with Apostolic succession. This is why the Catholic Church recognizes the Orthodox as Churches but not Protestant communities.

@joycegreer9391

Жыл бұрын

Like we care...lol. We don't recognize Catholicism as a church faithful to the Gospel and the Word of God, much less their claims of The One Church and authority. It's just a large quasi-Christian/pagan, apostate, heretical organization with a blasphemous pope and illegitimate priesthood.

@joycegreer9391

Жыл бұрын

You don't know the definition of church, and there is no such thing as apostolic succession. RCC didn't even exist until the 4th century, at the earliest.

Zoomer

Why listen to fallible Protestant Pastors, when we have the infallible Holy Scriptures? 🤔 Martin Luther and John Calvin disagreed with each other on what Jesus Christ meant by "this IS MY BODY ". Which Fallible Protestant should we listen to? Many Protestant scholars attest that Peter is the rock in Matthew 16. Others do not. Which fallible Protestants do we listen to? Peace always in Jesus Christ our Great and Kind God and Savior, He whose Flesh is true food and Blood true drink

@Mic1904

Жыл бұрын

_"Which Fallible Protestant should we listen to?"_ The same question extends to you, as you have merely chosen (for yourself) a different, non-Protestant selection of fallible men to listen to, while pretending this is a uniquely Protestant 'issue'.

@matthewbroderick6287

Жыл бұрын

@Mic1904 Excellent, you are making wonderful progress! For Scripture ALONE is a man made tradition, for the Manifold wisdom of God is revealed through the CHURCH, aa the CHURCH is the pillar and foundation of Truth. The same Church authority that existed way before the new testament was ever written and that later determined the Canon! Peace always in Jesus Christ our Great and Kind God and Savior, He whose Flesh is true food and Blood true drink

@Mic1904

Жыл бұрын

@@matthewbroderick6287 _"the Manifold wisdom of God is revealed through the CHURCH"_ Can you give provide me a source for this that somehow doesn't involve, as you call Scripture Alone, 'man made tradition'? _"the CHURCH is the pillar and foundation of Truth"_ A pillar and a foundation hold up something else. They are not that thing themselves. Also, from whence do you get this quote and argument and why is it authoratative?

@matthewbroderick6287

Жыл бұрын

@Mic1904 Holy Scripture teaches the manifold wisdom of God is revealed through the CHURCH, and that the Church is the pillar and foundation of Truth. The same Church authority that existed way before the new testament was ever written and that later determined the Canon! Peace always in Jesus Christ our Great and Kind God and Savior, He whose Flesh is true food and Blood true drink

@Mic1904

Жыл бұрын

@@matthewbroderick6287 Ok, so the Holy Scripture attests to the authority of the Church... but the Church itself long predates (according to you) the New Testament Scripture. So the Church predates the Scriptures, but only exists based on the authority of Scripture, which only exists once the Church itself has assembled it... which then declares the authority of the Church, which predates it... continue the circle.

God (YHWH) promised us a Messiah to lead us to goodness and Heaven. Jesus (Yeshua) is that Messiah (Christ). He is fully God and fully Man. He preached repentance & forgiveness. He did miracles as signs of his authority. He was crucified and died to forgive us. He was buried, and rose again from death. He visited his disciples to show them that He is alive again, on several occasions. He ascended to Heaven. YHWH and Jesus sent the Holy Spirit down to dwell in us and guide us. He promised to return. That is the Gospel. Or you can believe the Apostle's Creed, or the Nicene Creed. The core is the same. It comes from the Bible, and if you read it, you will see all of this, with enough detail to discern any counterfeits

Denominations can never unite, their very nature is division.

@HisLivingStone241

Жыл бұрын

As if the Church militant never experiences problems

@Dlee-eo5vv

Жыл бұрын

@🏛ΒΡΑΧΟΣ🏛 they took that name 1200yrs ago to justify their rebellious deeds. The militancy of the believer is his struggle to conform to Rightousness, grace upon grace. Not make your own churchs to reflect your interpretations and desires.

@HisLivingStone241

Жыл бұрын

@D. lee I never endorsed the idea of creating your own Church based on your sole opinion

@Dlee-eo5vv

Жыл бұрын

@@HisLivingStone241 that's what protestantism is.

@HisLivingStone241

Жыл бұрын

@D. lee Luther was a Catholic Monk and Priest, Calvin entered ministry and left his scholarship not on his own accord, and the Anglican Church was directed and influenced by former Catholic bishops (the first of which was Thomas Cranmer).

The Epistle of Saint Ignatius to the Smyrnaeans Chapter 8. Let nothing be done without the bishop See that you all follow the bishop, even as Jesus Christ does the Father, and the presbytery as you would the apostles; and reverence the deacons, as being the institution of God. Let no man do anything connected with the Church without the bishop. Let that be deemed a proper Eucharist, which is [administered] either by the bishop, or by one to whom he has entrusted it. Wherever the bishop shall appear, there let the multitude [of the people] also be; even as, wherever Jesus Christ is, there is the Catholic Church. It is not lawful without the bishop either to baptize or to celebrate a love-feast; but whatsoever he shall approve of, that is also pleasing to God, so that everything that is done may be secure and valid. Chapter 9. Honour the bishop Moreover, it is in accordance with reason that we should return to soberness [of conduct], and, while yet we have opportunity, exercise repentance towards God. It is well to reverence both God and the bishop. He who honours the bishop has been honoured by God; he who does anything without the knowledge of the bishop, does [in reality] serve the devil. Let all things, then, abound to you through grace, for you are worthy. You have refreshed me in all things, and Jesus Christ [shall refresh] you. You have loved me when absent as well as when present. May God recompense you, for whose sake, while you endure all things, you shall attain unto Him.

@ttff-bd2yf

Жыл бұрын

Why do you think Ignatius was so big on bishops?

@Adam-ue2ig

Жыл бұрын

And yet Ignatius never addressed a Roman bishop yet he addressed bishop in other of his 7 letters...interesting indeed If there was suppose to be a Roman bishop that had universal jurisdiction and supremacy dating back to Peter as the first "pope" all the way until current.

@sergioayala4379

Жыл бұрын

Correct Not Supremacy but Primacy, yet in his Letter to the Traillians Saint Ignatius clearly states that Without the Bishop there is No Church.

@sergioayala4379

Жыл бұрын

@@ttff-bd2yf Because Saint Ignatius of Antioch the Third Bishop of Antioch and Successor of Saint Peter the First Bishop of Antioch (Acts 11:26) was living in a time of Persecution and Heterodox Movements (Heresies) from with the church. In his Epistle to the Traillians he clearly states that Without the Bishop there is No Church and also Warns against the "the Poison of the Heretics."

@ttff-bd2yf

Жыл бұрын

@@sergioayala4379 what do you think Ignatius's view of an antipope type situation would be?

This video makes Protestantism sound relativistic. That's partly why I'm glad Protestants and their disagreements convinced me to remain Catholic.

@justchilling704

Жыл бұрын

Did you not here then speak of the importance of orthodoxy, and valuing tradition?!

@williammcenaney1331

Жыл бұрын

@@justchilling704 Yes, I did. But which Protestants decide what beliefs are orthodox when many Protestants disagree on which doctrines are fundamental? If "fundamental" means "essential" or required, does that mean that some divinely revealed truths are optional, that we don't need to believe them? To know whether a belief is orthodox, you need to know the difference between orthodoxy and heresy. But Dr. Ortlund's interviewer didn't seem to how how to define heresy. Years ago, a wonderful Protestant acquaintance talked with me about some disagreements between Protestants and Catholic. So she Told me that the disagreements don't matter since we love Jesus. Many Muslims love him, too. Though they think he's a prophet, they don't believe he's divine. That disagreement seems pretty important to say the least. Dr. Ortlund's interviewer didn't even tell us what he, the interviewer, meant by "heresy." Please read Chapters 2-3 in this 5th-century document because they relate to tradition. I think you'll see there's nothing Protestant about it. www.newadvent.org/fathers/3506.htm

@justchilling704

Жыл бұрын

@@williammcenaney1331 I’ll read the document, but just for the record historically and contemporarily, Protestantism has always maintained that to be saved you must believe a Triune God who’s father, son, and spirit, you must believe the Son incarnated as the the man Christ Jesus, and you must believe that God has appointed, or used, or called, various Prophets and Apostles to bring forth the scriptures for spiritual guidance and enrichment. The are the 3 bare minimal essential doctrines, their are more, but if you don’t get these right, the others don’t mean much. Unforeseen their have been small heretical groups that have sprung up, but they aren’t mainstream.

@williammcenaney1331

Жыл бұрын

@@justchilling704 I agree that Christians must believe those things. But if someone becomes a Christian by accepting Christ as his Lord and Savior, he may not know that he must believe the truths you mentioned. Can he still get to heaven if he never learns those truths? For example, what will happen to him if he dies minutes after he prays the sinner's prayer without hearing that God is trinitarian? I've talked with Protestants who believed that an unbaptized infant would go to hell if he died with out accepting Christ. What about Plato and Aristotle, my favorite Ancient Greek philosophers? Were they damned because they died before God the Son incarnated? I'm not making excuses. I'm only pointing out some cases where something might need to substitute for believing the things you reminded me of. Since my fields are philosophy and computer science, I reason like a logician. So I remind other people that to believe what the Bible teaches we or someone else must interpret it accurately. I don't believe what it teaches by merely memorizing the words and repeating them. A sentence, a string of spoken or written words, differs from whatit means. That's why you can translate between English and Attic Greek, say.

I say this with respect and I hope you don’t take offense to this because I do respect you and love your work Gavin, but I do think you Gavin and redeemed are downplaying what Luther and Calvin said about the Roman Catholic Church, they thought the pope was the Antichrist, and overall Luther and Calvin were pretty harsh regarding Catholicism. Respectfully Gavin you are downplaying this issue and it does seem like you only want to show the positive side to Protestantism and the relationship with Catholicism but leave out the blunt parts of Protestantism. Not trying to be rude but it is a genuine concern.

@TruthUnites

Жыл бұрын

not rude at all, you are welcome to share your thoughts. As I said, Luther and Calvin called the hierarchy corrupt and ravenous wolves but did not deny the ecclesial status of the institution. Here are just two examples: Luther: “in the papacy there is true Christianity, even the right kind of Christianity and many great and devoted saints…. The Christendom that is now under the papacy is truly the body of Christ and a member of it.” Luther’s Works, vol. 40, ed. Jaroslav Pelikan (St. Louis: Concordia, 1963), 232. Calvin: “when we categorically deny to the papists the title of the church, we do not for this reason impugn the existence of churches among them.” John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion 4.2.12, vol. 2, ed. John T. McNeill; trans. Ford Lewis Battles (2 vols; Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 2006) 1052, italics his.

@ProtestantKing7

Жыл бұрын

@@TruthUnites would you agree that they also said many things about Roman Catholicism that were pretty harsh and that they most likely today would not consider Roman Catholics to be saved? Such as the mass being idolatry and blasphemous, because that’s a pretty big deal. Because I definitely don’t think they would, popular reformed Christian’s like RC & MacArthur would quote Calvin to suggest that as well.

@daliborbenes5025

Жыл бұрын

​@@ProtestantKing7 I've read the Book of Concord a few times, and as far as I can say, nowhere do the Lutheran confessions say that the Mass is idolatry damning those who participate. Instead, it is presented as an unnecessary obfuscation of an otherwise valid Eucharist.

@ProtestantKing7

Жыл бұрын

@@daliborbenes5025 I didn’t say it was found there and I’m mostly speaking on Calvin. And yes Luther would believe that the mass is blasphemous. he was not friends with Catholics.

@daliborbenes5025

Жыл бұрын

@@ProtestantKing7 Indeed neither Luther nor Calvin were friends with Catholics, but both definitely thought Catholics are real Christians who can be saved. Harsh statements about what they perceived as doctrinal errors do not translate into a general proclamation of damnation. As far as I see, that's not anything different from what Gavin is arguing for.

I pictured him a bit chubbier