Former Priest Critiques Orthodox Theology (with Joshua Schooping)
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 16 พ.ค. 2024
- Rev. Joshua Schooping shares his top three theological concerns with Eastern Orthodox Theology, as outlined in his recent book-and why he is now Protestant.
My first video with Josh on his departure from Orthodoxy: • An Orthodox Priest Bec...
Josh's book: www.amazon.com/Disillusioned-...
Truth Unites is a mixture of apologetics and theology, with an irenic focus.
Gavin Ortlund (PhD, Fuller Theological Seminary) serves as senior pastor of First Baptist Church of Ojai.
SUPPORT:
Become a patron: / truthunites
One time donation: www.paypal.com/paypalme/truth...
FOLLOW:
Twitter: / gavinortlund
Facebook: / truthunitespage
Website: gavinortlund.com/
MY BOOKS:
gavinortlund.com/mypublications/
PODCAST:
anchor.fm/truth-unites
DISCORD SERVER ON PROTESTANTISM
Striving Side By Side: / discord
00:00 - Introduction
00:48 - Response to Criticisms
03:52 -The Three Biggest Concerns
4:48 - #1) Exclusivistic Ecclesiology
05:55 - Historic Consistency
08:44 - Modern Inconsistency
11:23 - What Kind of Exclusivism?
14:36 - The Anxiety of Exclusivism
18:50 - The Assurance of Faith
19:57 - Protestantism and Catholicity
22:16 - #2) Venerating Icons
22:32 - The "Unchanging Church"
28:33 - Historical Concerns
35:26 - Biblical Concerns
38:41 - Idolatry Creeping into the Church
40:58 - #3) Mariology
43:50 - Mary Displacing Jesus
47:40 - Reformation in the East?
49:48 - Cyprian's Exclusivity
53:10 - Unfair Critique of Protestantism
1:01:36 - Final Comments
The interviews with Pastor Schooping (and his channel as well) helped break a 30 year stalemate in my soul that kept me from fully believing that I am a child of God because I wasn't in the true church. I couldn't decide between Rome or Constantinople. Canterbury was as far as I could go. Both Rome and Constantinople made exclusive claims. I so needed someone to push back and peel back the veneer. I'm free of that burden! Thank God!! I am truly free of that burden. I can breath. I can rest. I can trust in God's grace. Thank you.
Thank God he set you free! I was there too at one time. I think Pastor Shooping calls it "an alternative object of faith." I just call it an idol, because that's what it is.
We must trust the Lord Jesus Christ, the Head of the church, He is the object of faith. Acts 4:12
The Catholic apologist Serenus de Cressy wrote that the most difficult argument he faced, is Jn 20:31,
"but these are written so that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name."
John here testifies that believing his testimony about Jesus, grants spiritual life. But ofcourse the Protestants he was engaging with, so Serenus says, affirmed the same Christ that he did. How then can one say that such people are not members of the Body of Christ, ie., his Church, when Christ has claimed them as his own and has granted them spiritual life?
When I discovered Orthodoxy, I made a 10+ year pit stop in Anglicanism. Rome was never really an option for me because (in my humble, but accurate opinion) all the most objectionable doctrines stem from St. Augustine. Neither did the appeal to Papal authority really carry weight, precisely because I already knew for sure I was a Christian in good standing, both because of and in spite of my Pentecostal upbringing. Anglicanism was the best choice for me for a long time, precisely for the reason you mentioned.
Eventually though, I could no longer tolerate being in communion with Calvinists (sorry Calvinists), so I made the decision to move my Anglo-Orthodox heart on over to Orthodoxy proper. For me, it was what I needed for the salvation of my soul.
That being said, there is an impenetrable fog of history. Choosing between Rome, the East, or something else is ultimately a judgment we have to make and be accountable for, because there is no choice which is clear to everyone -- if there were, the other choices would give up and join it. My advice to anyone considering a monumental change in their Church allegiance -- do it very slowly with as much information as you can, from sources just like this one (Slim's comment, and the video).
On the sane Orthodox side of the debate, you might be interested in an article by Fr. John Cox entitled, "Can You Baptize Without Baptizing?" He discusses reception without re-baptism, application of the canons, and he disabused me of the common notion that strict application of canons is normal, and relaxing them by "economy" is less valid.
@@joachim847 Dr. Ortlund is a Calvinist. It's simply the systematized belief that God is good and we are not. One might also recognize it by a different name; Christianity.
I'm very thankful for your channel and these conversations. I struggle with the ecclesiastical anxiety you have described and have found great value here.
So nice to see people being kind and accepting in the comment section. Finally...... normally there is so much anger towards people with opposing views. We as Christians just need to remember to speak the truth in love.
Another Great discussion from you two! Thanks for again coming together and addressing these much important issues.
He is so confused
Love this channel. Very helpful. Thanks for this. Praying for you and yours. God bless.
I listened to the first interview you had with PrSchooping two or three times. Thank you so much for doing these - very educational and edifying
Wonderful interview. Great to hear his perspective. Thank you.
He is in confussion
Mr.Gavin ortlund
As an ex-orthodox to protestant
I really appreciate this video
These were some of my concerns too
And the testimony was touching!!!
How can when i ask supoosed ex orthodox dont have any idea about orthodox church theology
Lord have mercy! You don’t know anything about orthodoxy If you traded it for Protestantism !
@@cpSharkBlast You realise how condescending that comes across right? "If you disagree with me you must not understand".
@@EmberBright2077 she supposed was an orthodox just ask her which is the mani word in orthodoxy that shows Deity taken from scripture original language text she has no idea.
@@cpSharkBlast as for me, I was already made aware at 12 years old that there exists the Orthodox Church by my mentor.
Like the Reformers, I too share their positive leanings towards Eastern Orthodoxy.
I should know I used to have a section in my writings dedicated to my admiration on the EO more so than the Roman Church.
However, I do not deem conversion necessary since whether they like it or not both EO and Protestantism have commonalities namely:
1.) The Lord Jesus Christ is the head of the Church not the Pope.
2.) Purgatory is a non-essential doctrine.
3.) Certain ranks of the priesthood can marry. (Though Protestantism takes this further.)
4.) Greater use of the Greek New Testament.
Further, it is also part of the EO's history that there was a controversial Patriarch, Cyril Lukaris.
By the way, even people within the EO are divided over whether or not he espoused Calvinist leanings, some conceded at various degrees to this while others say he branded Protestantism as heresy.
They thought his openness towards Protestantism was nothing more than his political maneuvering to keep his Protestant friends happy .
On my part however, I am in doubt that he did the latter since he did sponsor the translation undertaken by the monk Maximos into the Greek of his day.
Of which I do hope despite being poor can buy a copy of it in his memory in the future.
I should mention that I listen to Orthodox hymns like Psalm 135 and maybe Otche Nash.
Πιστεύω εις τον Κύριον Ιησούν Χριστόν και μένω εις αυτόν εις τους αιώνας, αμήν.
Credo in Dominum Iesum Christum et maneo in eum in aeternum, amen.
(Still practicing both of these 😊)
As I've always said, I am an Orthodox but not Eastern and a Catholic but not Roman.
I set both professions in Christ.
Thank you for your patience and God bless.
I grew up Protestant and have been lost in a theological jungle for the past 15 years. No peace… in a world of anxiety trying to figure out which Church is right. So I resonate so much with that portion of this discussion.
Not as long but same. Its only been a few months and im so tired. I could look into the arguments kf the church fathers and maybe i will but tbh just the scripture is still so pregnant with spiritual nourishment that im not dropping the time thats already too small that i spend with that to go and trace the timeline on bickering about whether or not the eucharist is only valid if the bread is unleavened. And so on for every other dispute.
@@callum4337 One thing is for sure... If we are saved by figuring out the correct theological position we are all doomed. I for one am Going with Orthodoxy. Protestantism is simply nonsense after one does get into the earliest witnesses writings.
@@culpepper7665Marian dogma originated in the protoevangelium of James, a gnostic writing. Look into this, please. Also prayer to the saints did not exist until late 3rd century to 4th century. Be very careful.
@@culpepper7665 Orthodoxy denying the filioque is extremely low iq as well. Christ clearly sent the helper (the holy spirit).
Keep reading scripture!
As far as churches go, I’d recommend a church in the “Pillar Network” you can check out their website. I can attest that these are your best bet when it comes to adhering to the word of God.
Here is the rundown:
1: GOSPEL PROCLAIMING: We proclaim the gospel of our Sovereign Lord and Savior Jesus Christ
2: BIBLE BASED: We submit to the Bible as our final authority in all matters of belief and life
3: LIVE EXPOSITION We promote live, expository preaching to equip the church
4: ELDER LED: We encourage churches to be led by a plurality of male elders/pastors
5: KINGDOM MINDED: We commit to kingdom multiplication through church planting and revitalization
Oh thank you so much for this!! So very helpful.
Thanks for this video! It would've been really useful to have this video when I was a young teenager. I've recently been listening to you (started with your discussion with Dr. Cooper on Baptismal Regeneration/Infant Baptism) and I appreciate how level-headed you approach these discussions (as well as critical responses to you). As someone who someday prays to be a Pastor, you've been a good example to me on how to discuss theological issues.
thanks so much, and so glad to be connected!
@@TruthUnites i see that man never mention as being an orthodox the elder saints experience of Theosis.orthodox theology is based on the experience of purification illumination and Theosis . The difference between orthodox church theology and experience and all western Christianity first im the difference of the methodology each one has to actually know about Deity. That former orthodox actually from his says seems has no idea from all these and see orthodox church theology under the methodology western Christianity does.
I've known Pastor Joshua for a long time. He is a great person. I might think there are good defenses for the Catholic/Orthodox view on these points, there is no denying that Joshua (and Gavin) present a worthy challenge that deserves a careful look. I estimate 9/10 Catholics and Orthodox will respond to these points from emotion rather than a slow analysis from history, logic, and the sources of divine revelation. Let there be true dialogue in charity.
Thank you Erick for your gracious response. You do a great job modeling dialogue in charity.
Erick and Gavin, you are my go to people for honesty in discussion of these topics. I don’t think I’ve seen more intellectual honesty than with you two. Thanks for what you guys are doing for Christ.
We would appreciate it if you'd find the time to answer some of these objections, Erick, as you are more learned than most of us here and I think these are matters that would lead people astray. I jumped to certain timestamps and watched to see what Pastor Joshua has to say, and from what I've seen so far, I think the points he (and Gavin) raised are very much answerable, especially on venerating icons and Mariology. I'd like to share my thoughts on these objections myself, but I've been busy as of late and couldn't set aside time to put up a detailed response. And of course, it's always better to hear from more learned theologians such as you.
@YAJUN YUAN Indeed. An honest apologist is always good to have these days though I am not saying that they're all perfect.
I would also add Protestants in that 9/10. For many Protestants, Pastor Joshua is finally "saved" having left Orthodoxy.
Pastor Joshua Schooping is one of the kindest person that I have known for a long time while I was a Dutch Calvinist. Back then when he was an Orthodox priest he helped me a lot on Orthodox soteriological spectrum by pointing out plurality and diversity among the fathers from semi Pelagian to semi Augustinian fathers. It is interesting to note that I do not feel betrayed when he returns to Calvinism. In fact the retention rate among Orthodox convert typically a coin flip. In seminary a brother told me that his Catholic priest left and return to Southern Baptist. I have benefited from Pastor Joshua Schooping before and still benefiting now as it challenge my decision to be a Byzantine Catholic more than a decade ago. As Erick Ybarra pointed out what he assessed is worthy of intellectual and honest conversation. I hope more and more Catholics like myself and Orthodox would take this as opportunity of evangelization to preach the Gospel as attested by the Patristic Consensus with calmness and warm-hearted spirit of dialogue. To this day I still maintain cordial conversation with Pastor Joshua Schooping. He is a good friend to converse with, an honest person who seeks genuine dialogue.
I ask Pastor Joshua Schooping privately last year to gather others ex Orthodox and Catholic priests who become Protestant pastors to make a thematic video addressing this topics. I am looking forward for that as it will help us Catholics and Orthodox to clarify Patristic Consensus. I pray may it will be conducted with spirit of dialogue and genuine reflection of the absolute truth that Christ has given to the Church throughout history. Maybe next time Gavin Ortlund could invite both Joshua Schooping and Matthew Joyner together. That would be fantastic.
Sounds great! I am curious, remind me please, Byzantine catholics is under the umbrella or in institutional connection with Rome, or is this the Orthodox that you are aligned with?
God rest
Are u indonesian chinese descent?
What a blessing this has been. I am a Protestant who has recently started reading about church history. It had me questioning the validity of my faith with antiquity being held up as a plumbline. This has elevated my concerns brother. Thank you both so much.
remember the first beliver in YAHUSHA (JESUS) are jewish-christian they belive in YAHUSHA and kept the torah (law) of God, we see even after the cruxifiction they kept the law of Moses as evidence in Luke 23:56 where we see the women keeping the sabbath day.
also i belive the church Historian Eusibieus (i think i spell it wrong ) says the name of first 15 bishops of Jerusalem who were Judeo-christians and who are of hebrew origin.
the jewish bishop stop around A.D. 135 where Hadrian had enough of the 2nd jewish revolt and thus outlaw jewish practice in Jerusalem and then Hadrian set up gentile-bishop in Jerusalem who the first gentile bishop i belive His name was Marcus.
@@giovanni545and the apostle Paul a Jew of Jews had to completely fight of the jews who were trying to get gentiles to basically become jewish and follow Torah and get circumcised etc. So yeah it makes sense that the jewish followers of JESUS to also continue in Judaism , but that is not for the gentiles and acts chapter 15 is not the starter kit for Judaism either
@@giovanni545also real Jewish scholars with PhDs in ancient languages say that the messiahs name was spelled and pronounced YESHUA so your wrong there. And another thing is the jewish people as a whole have rejected JESUS and only a tiny minority believe in Him today. So until the fullness if the gentiles comes in the jewish people will remain blinded. We true christians keep the moral aspects of the law , but nit the rituals and JESUS/YESHUA is our sabbath rest so we true christians let NO ONE judge us on these things for they where just shadows of things to come.
@@adamguy33 we must keep in mind with apostle Peters warning of apostle Pauls letter as stated in 2 Peter 3:14-17 where Peter warns of how Pauls letter one can miss understand and lead one to there own destruction.
also a exemple of how Pauls letter are hard to understand is this in Galatian Paul gave a scary warning to the galatian saying "you have fallen from grace" because they were trying to get circumcise right? well with that in mind why the apostle Paul circumsice a beliver whos name is Timothy? He did it so Timothy could accompany Him in evengalizing but Timothy did not fall from grace because Paul circumsice Him, so then whats going with galatian then??
we also gotta keep in mind in galatian Paul confess that everyone was against Him for judiazing the gentile converts, Peter,the man from James and even Barnabas was with them on gentile convert Judiazing.
@@giovanni545 well that was a then and has nothing to do with today. Judaism, Muslim , hindu Buddhism is all dead religions and people who follow them jew or gentile will go to hell. We as true chriatians today are not to conform or confirm Judaism in anyway. The old covenant is dead and the new one has replaced it and true christians have freedom from the law. The transformational time is over and the nail in the coffin of Judaism happened in 70 A.D.. I am under the law of Christ and not the law of Moses. Pauls heart was for his people, but after time he shock the dust off of his feet and moved on to the plan of God to bring in the gentiles and call a people that were not His . And if you are a gentile and not a Jewish person trying to go under the law that you can not keep in the first place then you will no longer be under Grace. All torahism and Hebrew roots people are decieved
Thanks so much for writing this book Josh - just bought it - 🙏🏼
He is absolutely in confusion he confuse orthodox church theology with the administration or catholic claims .
@@user-pj7sq7ce1f I think the one confused is you and your bitter grapes!!
Ex Orthodox here also. When I started reading the scriptures decades ago I realized that a lot of teachings in the Orthodox Church were not scriptural. Praise God for opening my eyes to see His Truth.
Where are you from brother? And can you talk more about your history for lefting the orthodox church?
@jesusalva33
I'm Greek from Australia, I was born into Orthodoxy. I left it in my late teens after reading the scriptures & have never looked back since. My faith and trust is not in a church or a religious institution of any kind, but in Christ Jesus and His Word.
@@giannihatzianmevris1861amen !❤
And how you came to the conclusion that Orthodoxy is false and protestantism right?
@@jairoquintanilla9357
When you spend enough time in the scriptures and study very early church history, you begin to realize that the Orthodox & Catholic churches had over time developed new dogmas and teachings that were never their early on and were contrary to the Scriptures.
Thanks for this great conversation!
As an Ex-Orthodox(now a Protestant Christian) I hear his testimony with tears and This interview enhanced my confidence for leaving Orthodox for good.
I’m been studying the Orthodox Church, I am not thinking about converting, just studying to have a better understanding of Church History.
Why did you leave the Orthodox Church?
Which protestant church do you attend? and why not any other?
It warms my heart to hear of the grace and mercy the Lord has given to the brothers, not to mention myself. May the Lord multiply your joy
Be a Christian, not a protestant, eastern heterodox, or a roman catholic. To be a Christian is to be born again by the incorruptible word of God, and to forsake the wisdom of this world which is foolishness with God.
“For it hath been declared unto me of you, my brethren, by them which are of the house of Chloe, that there are contentions among you. Now this I say, that every one of you saith, I am of Paul; and I of Apollos; and I of Cephas; and I of Christ. Is Christ divided? was Paul crucified for you? or were ye baptized in the name of Paul?”
1 Corinthians 1:11-13
“For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which are saved it is the power of God.
For it is written, I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and will bring to nothing the understanding of the prudent.
Where is the wise? where is the scribe? where is the disputer of this world? hath not God made foolish the wisdom of this world? For after that in the wisdom of God the world by wisdom knew not God, it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe.”
1 Corinthians 1:18-21
As someone who has been thinking of checking out an Orthodox church, this was the answer to my prayers to stay and fight for my Protestant family. Very powerful. And I can't grow a beard. I would not fit in at all.
Thank u si much Brothers fié this VERY important vidéo God Bless
This is really helpful, thank you. I've been trying to understand Eastern Orthodoxy, but listening to Eastern Orthodox priests and interviewees hasn't been as helpful as I hoped. They assume I understand their philosophy and vocabulary more than I really do, haha. So learning from a former Orthodox priest, who understands both Protestant and Orthodox thought processes, helps me comprehend it better.
Check out the interview "Rock and Sand" by father Josiah Trenham.
What philosophy you are talking about .all philosophical methodologies cant drive to any reall knowledge about the Deity . At least educate yourself correct
@Conquering Death That’s the impression I got as well. Many of his understandings of Orthodox theology felt like strawmen, at best.
@@conqueringdeath2559 everyone says that, if you don't agree it's cause "you don't understand"
Actually all philosophical methodologies to know about God in orthodoxy are seen as heresy.read the synodicon of orthodoxy to know about the Deity is not by some philosophical methodologies but through the spiritual levels of the life in the Holy Spirits grace. Purification illumination Theosis that is to experience God in his divine uncreated majestic Glory.
I'm in the middle of stressing myself out on these very questions... and I have been for awhile. This interview came at a good time
@@ApologeticGamer What made you leave Orthodoxy? I've never been, and never been a bit drawn to it, but some are very much. They seem to see it as more devout. It does seem to have a cultish aspect in its claim to being the only way to salvation. The Orthodox seem to me a pretty cold branch of Christianity. It doesn't seem to engender the love the bible inspires us to have, and it's the most legalistic branch of Christianity I've come across.
@@ApologeticGamer I'm baptized and raised evangelical protestant, but kinda grew disenchanted with how much their worship ended up feeling like some sort of "feel good" performance art. And so I always felt drawn to the more ancient church traditions for, what I perceived as their greater understanding of beauty and the sacred. (no one tradition in particular, just in general). but then as I started studying them more, the question of authority kept coming up and realized that every tradition tells you that they're the only way and if you're not part of them, then you're damned and going to hell regardless of your devotion to God and Christ.
These are extreme generalities, and I know I could speak to 100 different orthodox or Catholics and they'd all tell me something different. this is just the feeling my anxiety on the topic gives me, hahah.
@@ApologeticGamer I really hope these were truly not your arguments for leaving The Orthodox Church, because they sound purely based upon emotion. However I could be wrong so could you expound what is specifically wrong with exclusivism, and do you yourself not hold to a form of exclusivism in claiming that salvation is only found in Christ? In scripture Matthew 7:13-14 Christ gives an explicit example of how the road and gate to salvation is openly available to all, but he says that it is narrow ( being difficult, trials, pressed upon) and straight. And that there are few that find it.
If this isn’t exclusive I don’t know what is.
I mean with all due respect to you, Dr. Ortlund, and Josh Schooping this anxiety of Exclusivism being leveled at orthodoxy is falls flat on deaf ears. When if you spent any time following conversations between former Christians many who were reformed Protestants(Calvinist) and former Calvinists who are now non Calvinist. You would realize that there are so many former Calvinist that struggled with anxiety of the doctrine of double predestination and election, of this system.
Granted i don’t think that someone’s anxiety of an exclusive claim is a solid enough reason to reject it.
The fact remains that this sort of anxiety happens in many different faiths and traditions of faith. And even amongst secularist.
Yet I really don’t feel I have seen Dr. Ortlund discuss this much. If he has I’ll admit I was wrong. But if he has addressed it I would love to see his response to those that have battled with anxiety of double predestination, and all of the doctrines of tulip.
I mean if he is going to address the issue of exclusivism at least steel man your opponent actually engaging In the meat of his traditions exclusivist claims.
Truly the only people that can really have a real issue against any form of. exclusivism would be universalists. Which neither of them are. What they did was pretty much say that this form of exclusivism i disagree with because of my understanding of scripture hence it is wrong. Which is fine but to speak about an emotional state of anxiety as if ecclesial exclusivism is the only form of exclusivism that causes anxiety amongst people is silly.
What I find interesting is that the end of your comment you also listed worship of Mary needing to be reformed along with its ecclesial exclusivism than you would consider it again.
My question to you and mr Schooping is, is if you truly believe that Orthodox both eastern and oriental, Roman Catholic, Syriac, church of the east, and Coptic Christians worship Mary, than wouldn’t this be idolatry? And if it is idol worship according to you, than isn’t it the case that unless someone stops doing it and repents of that idol worship; wouldn’t it be the case that there is no salvation for them?
I suggest you at least here the other side out.
th-cam.com/video/1KwztwUWEXE/w-d-xo.html
@@ApologeticGamer you literally side stepped my critiques, and gave a generic response that doesn’t answer anything.
The same Christ of the Bible? Okay so if I hold to double predestination how is this the same God as a non-Calvinist. The doctrines of election and theistic determination fundamentally changes the very nature of God. If you have a different fundamental view of the essence of God than this would logically follow that you don’t serve the same God. Protestants try to deny this is fundamental but honest Calvinist and non-Calvinist at least admit that these 2 positions are in opposition.
This is not the only issue, what about Unitarians, or Modalists(which is a heretical form of the trinity) they all proclaim Christ as there Lord and Savior. Yet if you actually understand the differences in these beliefs you would realize that they are incompatible with one another and many especially Unitarians would reject trinitarians. Yet they still proclaim Christ as God and place their faith and trust in him. But many of them would call trinitarians heretics and outside of salvation.
Once again engage in specifics not in generalizations.
You say not some twisted version of Christ. But this begs the question how do you know that the version of Christ you hold to isn’t a twisted version?
Yes it is exclusivism regardless if you pretend it’s not. Try and actually read the definition of exclusivism and get back to me if you want I can post it. Exclusivism has an objective definition.
As far as the Orthodox Church not accepting you, we’ll this is from your perspective. For instance if the Orthodox Church is the True Church (the body of Christ) and their ecclesiology is correct. than to be outside of the body of Christ is to be outside of Christ. For how is it that one can have salvation outside of Christ. You can say, just as I can, or even a Unitarian, a modalist, Mormon, Jehovah witness, Calvinist. That we trust In Christ that the Bible teaches. But at the end of the day this begs the question as to who has the right Christ, the right gospel. Which they all fundamentally have different understandings of who Christ is which objectively changes the very nature of the gospel.
So it’s not a matter of rejecting you. It’s a matter of truth. people that care about truth and are consistent would acknowledge that these doctrinal differences changes who Christ is and every doctrine that follows from it and how we are saved. It is a matter of not sacrificing truth for the sake of a false unity. Which is what many Protestants especially evangelicals do( I know I used to be one)
Which is why the Orthodox Church saying their is no salvation outside the Church is a consistent doctrine that a majority of the Church fathers themselves held to.
Even the reformers held to this however they had a different ecclesiology( but their ecclesiology was not as loose and open the way you are purposing and what many modern evangelicals and Protestants proclaim today)
So to say the Orthodox Church rejects you is like a Unitarian or Jehovah witness complaining that trinitarian Protestants reject them. Which most trinitarian Protestants do. From the Church’s perspective you reject the church and placed yourself outside. I’m not saying you don’t have your reasons. But it’s merely a matter of from what paradigm or perspective you hold to or coming from. Just like a trinitarian can say no mr Unitarian it’s not that we reject you, it’s that you have rejected God because you reject who God is and have twisted the gospel.
This is a form of exclusivism, whether you acknowledged it or not.
I’m not saying we cannot be charitable with one another in disagreement or care for someone we don’t agree with. Of course we can. But when engaging in finding truth to make assertions that are inconsistent and side steps the questions than how can we say we care about truth.
That was an awfully short hour. I had to check to see if I was running the video at normal speed. Thanks for giving the Rev ample time to make his points without interrupting him. It facilitates the formation of a clear memory in an old brain.
I read the NT and I don't see hesychasm, I don't see energies, I don't see icons, I don't see the liturgy (which has changed again and again), I don't see deification (as opposed to sanctification), I don't see national churches. But I do see substitutionary atonement. And I do see that EO's ignore the councils that they are embarrassed by. Thank you, Pastor Schooping, for your book.
You gotta read the other half
LOL! 😄
in other words, you make the false presupposition of sola scriptura without any evidence and base your ideology on a heresy. gotcha
@@hippios Time after time Jesus said "Have you not read ...?" He held people accountable for what is written and had a higher view of scripture than you do. See John 17:17.
Your argument holds absolutely zero weight because scripture is NOT all there is in Christianity… almost as if Paul spent months and years teaching Christianity and traditions orally… thinking he Only taught what was in his short epistles over the course of years with these places is ridiculous. You’re making a claim absolutely no Christians believed for 1600 years.
Amazing stuff. Amazing!
Pastor Schooping is a great dude. It's so hard to find anyone who came OUT of the high church systems and into Protestantism. Schooping is the first I know of who doesn't stoop to low blows. He just tells the truth, in love and with peace in his heart.
Bought the book, looking forward to reading it.
Excellent presentation- thank you
Actually he is so confused about orthodox church theology.he mix up the administration status with the dogma belief ...
This conversation makes me SO appreciate separation of church and state.
Jesus said "who so ever" no denomination can save you. Only Jesus saves.
@@Death2Compromiseanyone who says they are the one true church is most certainly not. Only nut bags say these stupid things and really just belong to cults fueled by man made triditions who dont have a single clue what.the true church really is
Stop
That’s a fallacy. You’re acting like denominations don’t have different views on who Jesus was and what he did and taught.
@@Tornadospeed10 He's not wrong. If a baptist and orthodox christian believe that Jesus is God and he came down to die for your sins, was resurrected and will come again to judge the living and the dead... You guys believe in the same Jesus Christ lol
@@asto5767 well within that statement there are so many intricacies to what we mean. You could also say the same for Mormons too. Mormons claim they believe Jesus is God and their savior as well. But when you break that up, you find out they mean something different than you do.
This was great, thank you!
This has to be one of the best conversations I've heard on this topic. I learned a lot from this.
Many thanks Gavin & Pastor Joshua
Anyone can call themselves a pastor
I’ve been SO lost in the theological weeds lately, I was on orthodoxies door due to their string claims of history and tradition. I was twisting and contorting all that I’ve ever known of the gospel to fit the ideas of the Orthodoxy. I was crying and having panic attacks nearly every day out of fear that I’d end up in the wrong church… Several people from the Orthodox Church were really pressing me to join with incredibly compelling evidence, but no matter how convinced I was, there was no peace in that conviction, only terror, fear, something almost evil about making that shift. Thank God Almighty, that I got to speak with Joshua last night about this very issue… he took the time, nearly an hour to calm me down, and reveal the flaws in my logic. I broke down and sobbed tears of relief afterwards. I finally felt the demons leave me… I felt God again… Praise God
Sorry man that's funny😂😂😂
@@CKR000 ?
Dude that’s… kind of nuts. You sound unstable.
@@thegearhouse5337 don’t let this person bother you. I’m sorry you went through what you did. Praise God for guiding you to His truth which is found in His Word and His Holy Spirit Who lives in you!
@@CKR000There’s nothing funny about it. Don’t be a goofus.
Many of us went the opposite way, from Protestantism to Orthodox Christianity.
Could you host a debate, in which both parties verbalize their points?
Thanks!
In my experience, and this has just been my experience. People transit from one tradition to another, usually from what they were raised in to something else, based on arguments they can't answer. In my experience, few people can defend the faith they were raised in as well as the faith they transit into. Nicea 2 is devastating to modern Orthodox and Catholic views on iconography, I suggest studying it.
@@thadofalltrades , . The Catholic and Orthodox position holds that because God the Son took on human flesh in his Incarnation, it was possible to depict the Son in the icons. John of Damascus anticipated the main thrust of Calvin’s argument against icons when he argued that the Old Testament injunction against images was given in order to prevent the Israelites from attempting to represent the invisible God. He noted however that the situation changed with the Incarnation. There are strong historical evidence in support of the use of icons in the early Church. The Dura-Europos church has been dated to the pre-Constantine period which means that the notion widespread among Evangelicals that Emperor Constantine caused the early Church to fall from apostolic purity into the ceremonialism and sacerdotalism of Roman Catholicism is plain wrong. I challenge you to respond to deal with the theological defense presented by the Seventh Ecumenical Council (Nicea II) and other early Church Fathers, e.g., John of Damascus’ classic defense of the icons - that the prohibition against images apply not to the Incarnation of the Son.
Hi Gavin, Just a general question. Where do you get your sources about the early church fathers.
Thanks to your Channel i've gotten interested Into church History and it would be awesome of you could Help!
Thanks!
Good stuff, Dr Ortland. As one who almost swam the Bosphorus 15 years ago, this really spoke to me. Joshua’s three main issues that y’all discussed-ecclesiology, iconology, and Maryology-were the ones that ultimately were roadblocks for me as well, along with the Eastern Orthodox downplaying (if not denial) of penal substitution and imputed righteousness. So I became a traditional Anglican instead.
@@bersules8 There are plenty of TULIP Calvinists who are also Anglican and it’s totally consistent with the formularies.
Anglican😂😂😂
The head of your church (the Queen) just died. Maybe it’s time to return Christ as the head of the church
HAHAH ANGLICAN !?
So you would rather have the queen as the head of the Church than Christ. Absolute jokes
@@AR-qs2ng it’s all about the state of one’s heart. If one is hard hearted, they will not become Orthodox. It’s not about doctrinal distinctions or logic, or everyone would become Orthodox.
@@MrWesford people don't become " orthodox" because of the errors and unreformable, man glorifying, unscriptural doctrines of those churches. They defend some essential truths, but also beliefs that usurp God's glory and give it to men.
Excellent 👍🏼 thank you
This is my third time through. Great content and information!
Actually he has no idea about orthodox church theology he is talking in reality about the administration and suposed base his knowledge that orthodox Theology is about that
@@user-pj7sq7ce1f Schooping has some understanding of Orthodox theology; he has published books on Orthodox spirituality which were praised by many in the Orthodox world.
@@j.athanasius9832 you dont learn about orthodox church theology from books actually that is a western way based on scholastic theologian methodologies actually it is a wrong way. Sure a book can help but it is not the best way. In reality any type of philosophy analogia entis or analogia fidei that protestants use cant reality give any union or knowledge for the DEITY.
I like to think about the seven churches in revelation. They were not all the same. They all had different issues that God addressed. I see the true church is the churches that bear fruit.
Im ery impressed with this gentleman, I wish I had and responded more with the same kind, humble and gentle attitude he has towards those that persecute and attack him (same with Dr. Ortlund).
Thank you very much Gavin for these videos on EO. They have been super helpful in answering nagging questions regarding Church History and Protestantism specifically.
He actually is confused about orthodox church theology he thinks it is the same as catholism
@@user-pj7sq7ce1f Insofar as Protestant's primary objections with the papacy goes: indulgences, cult of the saints/Mary, image veneration, strict ecclesiology, justification by faith plus works, Orthodoxy has 3.5/5 of those same issues. [0.5 comes from toll houses which are 100% just Orthodox purgatory, at least from the Protestant (and Westernized Orthodox perspective)].
@@j.athanasius9832 well at first tolls is from Scripture in tbe parable with the rich man that though he will leave so many years scripture says απαιτούσιν την ψυχή σου. For who it is talking ???
@@j.athanasius9832 who are those that demand this night the soul of the rich man and way? That has nothing to do with the created fire of purgatory we orthodox dont believe in created fires from God even for hell . protestants and Catholics believe against scripture that heaven and hell are some created status
@@j.athanasius9832 judgement day Matthew 25:31:46 all call the Lord As Lord meaning the believe him as the text say for what the Lord asks them if they have what? Those are actually the Lords says..
Great interview brother!
Another amzing interview! 👏
What an absolute joke. The byline on this video says "Truth Unites," yet Protestantism is broken into thousands of different sects, each believing something different.
Here are men who think that they are smarter than the greatest saints of Christianity at the time when Christianity was wrestling with issues of Christ's deity and natures.
They can’t see the confusion, division & scandal of 000’s of sects caused by personal interpretation which is not of Jesus who willed unity Jn 17 11-23. Every single Protestant is guilty of disunity.
No liturgical sacrificial worship in Protestantism as commanded by Jesus Jn 6 51-58, so not “church”, more like a synagogue with prayer & teaching
Finally listened through to the end
This was so overwhelming! Just because it's old doesn't mean it's true. It's just old
Great interview!
Great conversation Thank you!
After coming back to God, I looked briefly into Orthodoxy. The appeal of being in an "original" "ancient" church was strong. When I found out they elevate Mary and dead saints above where I feel the scriptures do, that was enough of a red flag to keep me in the Protestant camp.
This is why I cannot become Orthodox. Something about it when looking into these issues just doesn’t seem right. It’s like a slight tilt when you expect it to be a straight path. These are signs to stay away as God is not the God of confusion.
How do you feel the saints are elevated above what the Scriptures say? What in particular makes you think that?
A number of the historical objections to Protestantism can certainly be disconcerting and are worth seriously grappling with, but I find the historical objections (especially when tied to the issue of ecclesiastical exclusivity) against EO and the RCC to be just devastating especially once the development of doctrine becomes apparent. Great video as always, Dr. Ortlund. Hopefully you’ll have Joshua back on again!
@Conquering Death Could you explain how those objections are overcome, and what he got wrong about orthodoxy?
Months pass, no response. One can only conclude that the answer to that question is a resounding "no."
My Lutheran-dar immediately went off when Schooping appeared on screen. He’s definitely got multiple volumes of Johann Gerhard’s Loci Communes behind him, and I believe I see a copy of the Tappert translation of the Book of Concord as well. The theology of Lutheran Orthodoxy is an excellent though rarely considered midpoint between Arminian and Calvinist theology in the English speaking world.
Pretty sure there’s a copy of Jesus and the Eyewitnesses by Richard Bauckham on his other side, too. Also, does anyone else instinctively scan for books they either have or know in videos like these, or am I just weird?
He belongs to Missionary Christian Alliance. Soft-charismatic baptist group. He says he likes their dual focus on gospel/exegesis and sanctification/theosis through emphasized prayer and fasting.
@@j.athanasius9832 I was aware he wasn’t Lutheran, I was just reacting to the Lutheran books on his shelf. (I’m not a Lutheran, either, but I lean toward quite a few Lutheran distinctives, particularly those of post-Luther Lutherans who were a great deal more systematic in their approach to theology than Luther.)
Small correction: Loci Communes is by Philip Melanchthon.
@@theodosios2615 Loci Communes is just Latin for ‘common places.’ Melanchthon was the _first_ to write a theological commonplaces/loci communes (which he did title _Loci Communes_ ) but it created a genre of Lutheran theology in the process (largely as a result of the four subsequent editions of his Loci Communes Melanchthon published during his lifetime as his thinking developed). Just as there are multiple series of Systematic Theology by different theologians that are referred to as a Systematic Theology, there are multiple Loci Communes likewise referred to as such. Johann Gerhard’s 39 volume Loci Communes is often considered the best example of the genre. Concordia Publishing House has been publishing a translation of Gerhard’s under the translated title _Theological Commonplaces_ , though the original title in Latin was _Loci Communes Theologici_ .
@@augustinian2018 Oh. I love Gerhard, but 39 volumes!? Maybe when I'm retired lol
Gavin, I really appreciate your content. I especially appreciate your calm demeanor as you approach these tough and touchy subjects. As someone who has grown up in Baptists churches in the heart of the Bible Belt and has a family in which most people that are religious are Baptist, I must admit that I can’t help but to think of our Lord’s saying of “removing the Beam out of your own eye before attempting to remove the speck out of your brother’s eye.” I say this regarding the critique of the exclusivity of the Orthodox Church. I many Baptists that I know are exclusive. Allow me to some reflections. I grew up around the “Once Saved Always Saved” type of Baptists and if your Baptist church doesn’t preach “Once Saved Always Saved” then you’re not “Bible Believing” and you don’t have assurance for salvation. Furthermore, there are the “King James Only” Baptist and if you’re Baptist church doesn’t preach exclusively from the King James then you’re not truly preaching the Bible and you don’t know the true Gospel because your church preaches from a corrupted modern translation that is not inspired and a person can only become saved through the inspired word of God. Furthermore, there’s a Baptist church on my home town that has a school attached to it and the parents have to sign a waiver saying that if their kid is going to go to their school then they must pledge to have no television in the house because they are being corrupted by the demonic secular world. So this kids are not allowed to have friends that have television because they are going to be corrupted by them. I know these sound like extreme examples, but these examples are normative where I grew up in the Baptists churches. I’m aware that not all Baptists churches preach this way, but that is my point, those Baptists churches that don’t preach that way wouldn’t be considered to be true Baptist. Moreover, there are the “Bridal Baptists” that say you are not true Baptist unless you attend a “Bridal Baptist” church that teaches that your pastor has baptism succession going all the way back to John the Baptist. That sounds familiar to the Apostolic Succession that I hear Catholics and Orthodox being critiqued for. There’s also the “Trail of Blood” Baptist that believe that the Catholic and Orthodox Church martyred all the Baptists though out church history and they had to underground to stay alive while the false Catholic Church took over history and that’s why there is so much anti-Catholic doctrines within the Baptist tradition. So much so that Catholics are NOT Christian and certainly are not saved. Talk about exclusivity. I’ve heard you speak in other videos about the Baptist catholicity because of open communion but let’s be honest, most Baptist have no reverence for communion so it’s not really litmus test. The true litmus test would be who is allowed to preach in your church. Allow me to ask you this, would you allow a Methodist, Lutheran, Pentecostal, mega-church non-denominational pastor, an Independent Fundamentalist Baptist pastor like Steven Anderson to come preach their doctrine at your church? Moreover, do you honestly believe that Steven Anderson, a fellow Baptist pastor, would allow you to preach in his church? Again, where is the true mark of catholicity within the Baptist churches? It seems to me the only catholicity that can be found in the Baptist tradition in within the Southern Baptist convention but let’s be honest, the SBC is a mess. I know many former Baptist people that have either turned to atheism or universalism because of how exclusive the Baptist churches really are and they are spiritually injured from all the hellfire and brimstone that has been screamed at them. I understand why so many Catholics and Orthodox get so worked up in the comments. It’s because the critiques are so one-sided.
There is also the issue of the Protestant tradition as a whole of being too inclusive. So much so that you have LGBT marriages and LGBT pastors and women pastors.
One more reflection regarding the prayer to Mary. Now again, I grew up being taught in the Baptist churches that praying to Mary is a BIG NO and I see why people would be startled by a prayer such as the one that Joshua shared. Now I know that the hardcore apologist despise the appeal to emotion but prayer is exactly an appeal to emotion. Prayer isn’t cold, calculated, or analytical. It’s pouring your heart out to God and sharing with Him the most intimate parts of your inner being. With that being said, that prayer reminds me of the time my cousin was in a really rough place. He was deeply depressed and troubled and came to me and said that he needed prayer and that he didn’t have the strength or courage to pray himself because of his emotional state and asked me to pray for him instead. That’s the vibe that I get from that prayer. It doesn’t seem like an everyday type of prayer even if it is found in a prayer book. In order to pray that prayer genuinely and with your heart attached to each word, you would have to be in a place of total despondency and despair and you are turning to Mary to help bring you to Jesus because you don’t feel like you have the inner strength to do it yourself. I guess the real issue falls on the doctrine on communion of Saints and what you believe that Saints in Heaven are doing while they behold the face of God and what level of awareness they have of the saints on earth. That reminds me of when my grandma passed and she said that she was going to watch over me and continue to pray for me when she gets to Heaven. Maybe she was right that she is watching over and still praying for me. And if she is, how much more so is the Mother of the Incarnate God, our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.
I am no scholar and don’t pretend to be so please forgive me for not appealing to any scholarly work or any Church Father and only appealing to my own real life experience. I would love to hear your thoughts Gavin because I do respect your opinions.
Gavin’s “calm demeanor” is a get out of jail free card and an attractive boost to his arguments. It’s the how could he be wrong he’s so well meaning and sweet
Gavin's calm demeanor is a debate tactic and ropes people in to thinking he is trustworthy and wouldn't intentionally lead anyone astray. I'm not saying he would but just becareful. The whole "good faith" polemic is a useful tool. He has mastered it.
If I could just weigh in on this as a non American protestant Christian. I've been around American baptist Christians and church people long enough to see where you're coming from. There's definitely a lot of exclusivity and cultism in that realm, and yes, the vitriol from the once-saved-always-saved and King-James-Only crowds can be devastating. Lots of standards there that are man-made, and every time you bring them back to Jesus's standards, a whole big argument ensues. That can be extremely hurtful, and no doubt has it driven many not only from the Baptist church but from salvation.
What I'd like to propose is that, despite its prominence in America, the SBC is not as representative of protestant Christianity as a whole as it may seem to be (neither is the Calvinist movement, for that matter). When I moved to America I was shocked at how certain ideas are widely taken for actual Gospel, when they are 100% an American invention, and promulgated nowhere else in the world, at least not nearly to the same extent - simply because no one who picks up the Bible to find out what it teaches will arrive at these conclusions, unless he has been taught a specific doctrine first, and now looks to the Bible for prooftext, dismissing anything to the contrary he might find in there.
In my experience, and to see this you may have to look outside the SBC or even outside of America, that I agree with, there isn't nearly as much animus between Protestant churches of different streams of thought as some Orthodox and Catholics claim. Even here in America, there are conferences taking place all the time that draw Christians of all backgrounds, and people don't ask each other "What kind of church do you go to, what translation are you reading, are you even saved." I know plenty of Christians willing to support missions and Christian humanitarian efforts without agreeing with the founders of the respective organization on every single point of doctrine. I understand the desire for clarity and unity in a complex world, and for holiness in a fallen world. But discarding everybody outside your specific tradition, making no effort to evaluate the fruit as Jesus said to do and basically setting up your own standards for salvation, that isn't only a lazy way out, I think it also puts you in the immediate neighborhood of blaspheming the Holy Spirit: taking something the Lord is doing and calling it nothing, or a work of the devil. That's not something to be taken lightly.
The Orthodox and Catholic Churches are also not, nor have they been historically, as unified and unchanging in their traditions as they claim.
I think the whole point of this interview and of this whole debate is not to tear down the Orthodox church, from whom other denominations can actually learn some valuable lessons, or glorify Protestantism, which undoubtedly comes with its own pitfalls. I think the point is that every church body and conglomerate, Orthodox or otherwise, needs to accept that they are just as fallible and flawed as the next one, and their standards for salvation have to line up with those the Bible puts forth, they must be no lower or higher. It's true that some Protestant churches have been too much on the permissive side, lowering the standards below those of the Bible (not that the Catholics are doing any better at the moment when it comes to showing the world some backbone). This doesn't give the Orthodox permission to put yokes on people for salvation that God isn't, and claim superiority on that basis.
I think it all comes back to flawed and complex humanity. Exclusivism and failure can be found anywhere in the church. The question is, do we have the patience and the love to wrestle through it with our fellow Christians. Do we acknowledge that we're brothers according to the Bible's standards of salvation, even though the other still needs some cleaning up, and hey, so do we! The challenge Jesus presents us with is to love unloveable people and serve them, suffer for them, probably not even get a thank you. In His thirty something years on earth He didn't take the easy way out by pointing fingers and withdrawing, although He (and He alone) would have had the right to. If we're gonna follow in His footsteps, we have to play by the same rules and do the same hard work. We need to be set apart by God's standards, and His alone.
@@AR-qs2ng your comment sadly says more about you than about Gavin. Gavin is as genuine as you get. If your best argument is to attack his genuineness, can I suggest you examine your heart before your heavenly Father
The KJV Only baptists (The IFB) don't preach you must read KJV to be saved
Your biased and not genuine
The Baptist Church has the correct theology and that should matter more than your personal experience
This was great. Spot on with the historical stuff.
Not really
I found there to be great defenses to many of the arguments laid out here. People come to the EO Church for a variety of reasons. If they come for any other reason but Christ it will ultimately not be sufficient. When looking at why people leave the church that seems to be the common theme. The comments section is no place to adequately respond to the arguments laid out here. I just hope that strong opinions and positions about the church are not formed without personally giving the orthodox life a chance with an open mind. The faith is so much more than what we just think that our decision must be informed by the life as much as the literature.
This is a very concise way of putting what I have been trying to articulate myself!
What would you respond to someone who says “there is so much more to Mormonism, or to Islam, than what we *think*” - and that it must be lived to be properly evaluated?
@@GB-ji1sv What would you say to someone who says they have the correct interpretation of the Holy Scriptures because they believe the Holy Spirit is with them, yet, their interpretation is drastically different from yours (which you also believe comes from the Holy Spirit). Who is right, and why? Why is your exegesis and interpretation more accurate than the Muslim or Jehovah Witness? What authority governs this? If it's the Holy Spirit, where does He speak his final judgment on the matter? Because the fruits on your end, are just as good as the fruits on the Jehovah Witness' end, they do much evangelism, and they are often more passionate and willing to give up their entire lives for their beliefs. By what authority do you say your exegesis is more correct than theirs when their fruits have the potential to be greater than yours?
Well, the pagan idolatry that’s in your church and the different gospel you teach is a strong repellent to The Beliefs of The Early Church and will make Christians run away ultimately, youre the modern day Pharisees preaching dead traditions and a false gospel.
@@ramichahin2you simply lack knowledge on what “idolatry” is lol. If we go off the second commandment alone, you and me are both idolaters for having computers or phones with images of what is on earth…. But we’re not, because you require more than an English reading if exodus to understand idolatry because I mean, didn’t got instruct Moses to create golden cherubim and said he’d dwell between them in Exodus? That is certainly a statue and image of what is in heaven.
Thank you, brothers
Kind regards Kim
Check out The Lord of Spirits podcast
5 Master degrees and 2 PhD for Pastor Seven De Young,
You're welcome!
Can’t wait for this video! I have looked into EO before but had some serious issues with its claim of exclusivity and doctrines. I know some (not all) online orthodox can be very vitriolic about criticisms so thank you for putting this out and blessing them regardless!
Same, I started out by diving into more eastern church fathers. But what really drew me in and made me interested in was people like father spyrem priest who always produced this sense of practical spiritual wisdom that you feel is more about Christian living and less about dogmatic theology
I think that goes everywhere in Protestantism and the Calvinists are one of the practitioners of this art.
I have looked into Christianity before but had some serious issues with its claim of exclusivity and doctrines. I know some (not all) online Christians can be very vitriolic about criticisms so thank you for putting this out and blessing them regardless!
@@jasona.4846 I get what you’re trying to get at with this, but I think there is a difference between saying only those who call upon the name of Christ will be saved and only Christians who are in one specific institution are saved and all others, regardless of their true faith in Christ and their trusting upon his name and work for salvation, are damned.
@Bb Dl
Deeply, deeply ignorant statement. I'm on mobile so I won't look back over: here's a starting point: learn the definition of "katholikos", or "Catholic". It does not refer to the papacy, or an institution, or a denomination, at any time that any church Father references it because *the papacy, and denominations did not exist until 1054* and the patristic period was by anyone's estimation, ended well before that. This invalidates your entire, ignorant statement.
So excited to get into this! I was seduced by the art, music and beauty of the EO church for awhile until I figured out the theology and also found myself becoming more and more religious and self righteous towards other Christians due to my efforts rather than being close to Jesus.
I found the same thing with RCC
“Seduced”? Are you equally “seduced” by contemporary Christian music, art, and “beauty”? Ironically, becoming “more religious” should do the opposite of what you describe as your experience - it should lead to humility. If you think self righteousness is exclusive to EO practise and adherents, you’ve got a shock coming when you spend time in Protestant churches!!
No wonder because in the first place you are seeing your journey as “your own effort.” You started and went through it with a wrong mindset, so much so that you seem to have or have had a distorted view of its art, music and beauty.
@Benjamin Eby These are the teachings which drew me to the Orthodox Church exactly. I desperately want to just “turn it off”, and just focus on defeating passions and evils and self wills. The problem with orthodoxy is that it is lying when it presents itself as simply “the fullness” of Christianity. Historically, it was Christianity in and of itself; anyone outside the Church *is not* Christian. And yet I’ve seen so many who deeply love Jesus Christ, and who has even caused great change inside people towards righteousness outside of the Church. According to St Tikhon though, even the act of worshiping God outside the Church is actually an affront to Him. But even Jesus praised the Samaritan, the schismatic heretic. It’s not so much a problem with Orthodoxy’s modern teachings, but the universal condemnation with which they speak of schismatics and heretics without being able to prove they alone have grace, as I see grace everywhere.
How you participate in the Holy Eucharist now?
I was very confused for awhile whether I should leave the Baptist Church for Orthodoxy because they claimed apostolic succession from before the schism of 1054
Thank you Mr Ortlund
❤ beautiful !
Those Gerhard volumes behind Josh are glorious!
Great Discussion
As a seeker who stumbled into an Orthodox parish and brotherhood recently, I have found this discussion quite helpful. I fell away from Protestantism when I was a teen because of how empty the experience had been and how inadequate were the answers and guidance I received, so facing these types of questions head-on is an essential exercise -- giving them a free pass would be a recipe for disaster.
I don't understand something, you converted to eastern orthodoxy? or are just looking into it?
@@JosefFurg1611 I was looking into it as an inquirer. They wanted me to become a catechumen and stop asking questions. Accidentally got my brother into their cult before deciding I didn't like having their egregore in my head. I still drop in for social events periodically since I'm fond of the people (though haven't in a while due to a recent and severe illness), but I do not attend their liturgies and other psychic programming events.
@@k98killer Cult? Psychic programming events? lol... not sure you went to an actual Orthodox Church.
@@culpepper7665 I attended a pair of Antiochian Orthodox parishes and a Russian Orthodox monastery.
Thank you both for this interview. What I just learned concludes my 6 month investigation/consideration of EO.
So your becoming orthodox?
Are those Johann Gerhard’s Loci in the background?!
Thanks for the video!
most likely, since the loci deal with bellarmine, any good protestant interested in that dialogue would need it to complete the chemnitz-bellarmine-gerhard dialogue
Orthobros will comment in 3... 2.... 1.....
lol comment of the century.
But you know they will lol.
Are Orthobros and Dyerites the same?
Lol
Its concerning to see how many people see living/preaching the gospel is to simply live online, searching videos about people leaving orthodoxy to mob the comments section and claim superiority. Un-Christian behaviour.
The best Christians likely aren't even online, being far too busy supporting their families and helphng the poor.
One of my clients was consumed by the question about who had the authority to give the Eucharist. She kept researching who had the real power from Christ. In the meantime, she didn't seem to really know the Lord in her daily life. I never really knew what to say to her, but just prayed. I hope she finally learned to put her trust in Christ, because He alone saves us through faith alone.
Amen! I see so many people searching, deeply searching for the right system. They move from this to that, then become unsatisfied with that and move to something else. They'll never be fully satisfied because Christ isn't at the center of it.
@@78LedHead the Eucharist is exactly Christ st the center! If your study and investigation leads to confusion, that isn’t always the fault of the thing you investigate…
@@78LedHead Right! This desperation for getting the monopoly of God's Grace and Power is really damaging to Christ mission. It looks to me as the perfect example of human struggle to control over others.
@@TheB1nary True indeed, and I'm certainly not perfect. There are very personal things in scripture, though, things that you or a Pope or any priest can't take away from me. God was able to convey a message to me through words, through men. The Eucharist doesn't = salvation. "This is my body" doesn't now mean "if you don't partake of this in the Catholic church or Orthodox church you aren't saved." Christ came not to burn the heathen friend, he came to save him.
@@78LedHead Do you believe Jesus when he said he would build his Church? do you trust scripture when it tells you where to go to find the truth?
Jesus and scripture are in accord. The point is if you trust Jesus at his word that he started a church and that he gave that church authority than if takes away the uncertainty. The problem I see here is that people are distrusting Jesus and trying to make sense of things on there own. Lets trust Jesus at his word. Ref MT 16:18-19, Mt 18:15-17 Lev 17:8-10 1 Tim 3:15 Eph 3:7-11
Time-stamps
14:07 - 1 Corinthians 12:3, Buddhists or Mormons wouldn’t pass this test because they wouldn’t say Jesus is Lord in the way Paul understood that.
14:42 , 15:40 - Exclusivist claims. Personal judgment is unavoidable.
16:26 - How conflicts and view of bishops affect ecclesial allegiance.
17:42 - Do we need to become historians to find salvation? At some point, we need to ask: where is the Gospel and New Testament?
19:27 - The doctrine of the church is an item of faith; it’s not an item of calculation and mathematics.
22:45 - The church is unchanged?
23:40 - veneration
25:37 - how long does it take for something to become holy tradition?
26:00 - art in history
This was an extremely good interview with perfectly laid out critique points. Being familiar with EO practices ethnically, and theology through study, it is still oftentimes difficult to lay out critique for people emotionally involved in the, as you beautifully pointed out, EO as a life raft. Thank you kindly, Dr. Ortlund!
What you guys don't get and can't get is that The Church actually is a true life raft. Your idle hands theology has never faced true persecution. The only places this Mish mash of heresies ever thrived is in Landa where the state and laws supported it.
My people were conquered and enslaved in 1360. It lasted until 1912. This is the Prespa region of North western Greece. All we had to do was deny that God could be man and revere Jesus as a prophet alongside Mohammad. We instead chose to suffer in the world. Own nothing. And Worship and Commune on mountainside secret temples to Christ for nearly 600 years.
Your "church" will never endure that and survive. You can claim faith and Jesus all you like but once the heads start coming off your pastors will slowly fall short.
@@BarbaPamino
Thanks for showcasing my exact point.
Eastern Orthodoxy is unfriendly to critique, in any shape, due to emotion, historicity, and claims of exclusivity.
Precisely why I said it's oftentimes difficult to speak anything but praise. I'm Bulgarian, all too familiar with the Ottoman yoke, AND the EO. You'd be amiss to say no one converted to Islam - so your whole "we absolutely endured" argument's invalid.
Further, you should also be familiar with the communist persecution of Protestantism - a very real case of an enduring church.
But even so, this is entirely not the topic of the video, so I'll end my comment here. Be sure to watch the interview, I honestly believe you'll find it interesting; God bless you.
@@sagadiablo no offense but you slavs had an uphill battle to find identity. Many didn't come to the church in the right way and then you had to deal with al that soviet mumbo jumbo.
I said my people endured almost 600 years. My actual family.
There's no emotion in my response. I'm not angry or hyper. Protestantism is simply void of paradosi and theologically heretical. That's just a fact. All I see in this interview are two smug men thinking they know better. We have many plenty of those types in Greece too, but we also have a plethora or martyrs and saints.
@Conquering Death his only battle is with himself. They don't like the Truth because we say it and then acuse us of emotion response. I say what I say with complete dispassion. I have no rage in these people. I realize they were presented a broken tradition and thus broken transmission in their own upbringing and parishes and went inwards to themselves to find the answer. If you want to rely on self then protestantism is the way that'll consume you. You can live in delusion and prelest and convince yourself it's for Christ. But you can only do that when it's easy to do so. Persecutions are coming. Protestantism won't survive them. The Shepherd will call his sheep home. I can only hope to be a sheep dog that helps.
And for anyone that thinks I'm being too harsh, imagine these people seeing Jesus flip a table and drive out people with a whip. They'd turn on him like Judas did. Because that's how'd they feel inwards.
@@BarbaPamino Generally it's considered bad practise to write an entire character to explain away why someone doesn't agree with you.
It would be really good to see Mr. Schooping dialogue with an Orthodox clergyman and/or apologist
I've met some clergy in the wild who have some *opinions* ;)
Bought the book! :D
Maybe you should do a 'clips' segment, to capture the 'best bits' of these long format videos.
Fantastic interview.
SUCH GOOD CONTENT. 😁👍
Hey Gavin, could you explain what Josh’a point at 35:10 is? What is the distinction he is making there? I don’t understand. Thank you!
The Gospel is supposed to free you; at multiple points in his epistles, Paul demands believers not force a brother into a deed which his conscience prohibits. The demand that one bows, venerates, and offers incense to icons, is certainly an accretion to the Gospel. Jesus never required his disciples to do these things.
Very powerful interview. This may be how we can start to find unity as the big, messy family of God.
He says the Orthodox Church can't fix things and that it has changed many things. Pick one; they are inconsistent.
Hi Gavin. Love your channel. You are one of my theological and apologetic heroes (and I'm Catholic). I always appreciate your challenges to non-Protestant perspectives and this interview was not an exception.
I'm seriously trying to consider what it would take for me to "de-convert" from Catholicism and affirm the central Protestant tenets. Below is one of two primary hiccups. It's probably not sound, but I have a working hang-up that's something like this:
1. Protestant traditions claim that Holy Scripture is the sole infallible authority to “establish articles of faith.”
2. Holy Scripture interprets Holy Scripture; “the prophetic and apostolic writings of the Old and New Testaments are the only rule and norm according to which all doctrines and teachers alike must be appraised and judged”
3. Particular, identifiable, systematic, and incompatible Protestant traditions have developed using (1) and (2) as their authoritative standards.
4. If (3), then it seems that (1) and (2) are not sufficient principles to determine with certainty what some doctrines of the church are.
5. Protestant traditions seem to know with certainty what some doctrines of the church are.
6. The source of this knowledge must be something other than Scripture alone.
7. Protestant traditions seem to have two infallible authorities: Holy Scripture and Sacred Tradition.
Another one is something like this:
1. Tradition is esteemed but can be reformed.
2. Particular doctrines primarily distinguish Protestant traditions.
3. These doctrines are defined by Holy Scripture alone as the sole infallible rule of faith.
4. Using Holy Scripture alone, different traditions define particular doctrines incompatibly with other traditions.
4. Either Scripture teaches incompatible interpretations of particular doctrines or an external source defines these doctrines.
5. Magisterial authorities within Protestant traditions define these doctrines.
6. If these doctrines changed, then that tradition would lose its identity.
7. Therefore, some traditions cannot be reformed.
I also am unconvinced by Josh's statement along the lines of Protestant traditions acknowledging that they cannot have practical pastoral communion, but are nonetheless still Christians. Some confessional documents seem to condemn Christians for holding different views, namely the Anabaptists for denying infant baptism in the Augsburg Confession and Arminians in the Synod of Dort. These seem to explicitly question the veracity of their Christian faith based on "second tier" doctrinal concerns. Since the basis of these condemnations are from Scripture alone, which is also the source and method that Anabaptists and Arminians use, it seems that Scripture is either contradictory regarding what it teaches on these subjects or these Protestant traditions have a full knowledge of the Gospel contained within their tradition. This claim seems identical to what Catholics and Orthodox Christians argue.
I want to know if my reasoning is crazy because I really want to know the truth behind these matters. At this point, it still seems that if all Christian traditions are making similar claims from Sacred Tradition, then Rome has the best historical record for being the most authoritative early on.
Check out a documentary called Protestantism's Big Justification Lie, and you will see exactly why Protestantism is false.
This guy is almost like a Reformer of the Eastern Orthodox Church. Way to bring the light of the truth! Semper reformanda!
More like a protestant revert. He never really fully embraced Orthodox teaching at all, was trying to argue that Penal Substitutionary Atonement was Orthodox teaching after he was ordained as a priest.
@@adrummingdog2782 you'll always be hard pressed to show True Light to those that can't comprehend the struggles of darkness.
This man was a western materialist with spiritual problems who entered the Church and never healed those preexisting issues. So he reverted back
He was orthodox a very short time and reverted to Protestant.
Maybe this is why I always felt so unwelcome in traditional orthodox churches. "Lifeless" is a word I would use to describe these places. Maybe it's because the icons are indeed dead.i was told they were a window into the unseen world. Now I know which world.
Hades
[As used in Luke 16:23]
ᾅδῃ (hadē)
Noun - Dative Masculine Singular
Strong's 86: Hades, the unseen world. Properly, unseen, i.e. 'Hades' or the place of departed souls.
Or because you’re spiritually weak. And I don’t mean that in a mean way but have you even considered you don’t like the house of God because you are spiritual unwell and push Hod away?
Overall I found this much more enjoyable than the first video, and this isn’t a criticism
This provided some insight into certain tendencies in Eastern Orthodoxy that should be considered by all who are concerned about the Church’s unity in Christ.
I’m very appreciative of Hank Hanegraaff, and some of the ways that Eastern Orthodoxy is closer to Protestant Orthodoxy than Roman Catholics are with regard to the plurality of church leadership and a better understanding of marriage in the priesthood, so it is good for me to think deeply about the unique claims of Eastern Orthodoxy about institutional exclusivism.
I found Joshuas’ thinking and heart very refreshing. We need to rediscover the Catholicity of the Lordship of Christ grounded in the recognition of the authority of the Apostles that he sent, which we have not lost, because their teachings have been preserved in the scripture.
The post-Apostolic Church is a pillar and witness to the Pillar of Apostolic inspiration (Christ being the cornerstone). But it is not The Pillar itself but a “buttress” to that Pillar (1 Tim. 3:14-15). It plays an essential part, as the hands to the body, but the foundation Pillar is Christ and his Apostles. To claim an institutional exclusivity outside the doctrine that was established by the Apostles, goes beyond them, and causes unnecessary anathemas and schisms in the body of Christ.
So blessed to hear Joshua’s peace in having seen the beauty of that unity.
How you participate then in the one true Holy Eucharist in the protestant world ???
@@user-pj7sq7ce1f, by believing in one Lord and the one baptism he gave us by water and Spirit. We participate in the Eucharist by repentance and with thanksgiving as do all Christians who know that the Lord is our only hope. We call all our brothers who hold fast to this same Jesus. We look not to an earthly temple, but have come to the heavenly Jerusalem. We pray we might bring it to earth by the love of our brothers and sisters in Christ. Something like that.
@@jrhemmerich As Irenaeus said, material succession amounts to nothing if there is not succession of doctrine. And even Augustine notes that while the bishops and Ecumenical Councils have authority, their authority is superseded by that of Scripture. Especially when the Councils give up on Scriptural exegesis in favor of defending ahistorical and non-Apostolic traditions, under penalty of anathema.
@@j.athanasius9832 very true. And one can tolerate a lot of poor teaching even by councils, so long as scripture is held as ultimate and the council fallible (a mere mediating place for the Spirit to do its work). The minute the post-Apostolic church by bishop, pope, patriarch or council becomes “infallible” it raises itself up against the commission given to the Apostles as the standard bearers for all he had taught and would teach them by the Spirit.
In this relativistic age the Church/Christian Assembly is the life raft, but we must avoid the siren call of Dostoyevsky’s Grand Inquisitor at all costs, lest we become what we should fear most-idolaters who don’t know they are blind.
We believe in Church tradition, the best tradition, the one direct from the Apostles themselves. All else is amendable footnotes.
@@jrhemmerich which Eucharist because protestants against scripture call it a symbol
At 51:00 mr schooping says that cyprian was writing about christians uniting around the basics of the faith. What are the basics of the faith in protestantism and how do u identify them??
The Nicean Creed is a pretty good place to start, wouldn't you agree?
I have converted over to Orthodoxy being a Protestant for 30yrs. I too have experienced called a heretic and lost lots of friends and friends were told not to talk to me. So I understand this. Yet I did not leave to become,” a millionaire.” but to follow as I see the truth I saw to many divisions in the Protestant movement I experienced many denominations from reform to Baptist to Pentecostal to non-denomination. Each said of one another they are deceived
What was that wedding they attended? You know the one that they asked the mother about the wine?
THANK YOU for standing up and speaking out, Joshua! We know you get a lot of heat for telling the truth!
He actually is confused of what orthodox church theology is about i guess because his western back round think that having reading some orthodox books he knows about orthodoxy
@@user-pj7sq7ce1f SOUR GRAPES! Um, he has a Ph.D. in Orthodox theology! I think he understands it just fine!!
@@zachuram that is actually the problem but you dont realise it.
orthodox Theology is actually the experience of Theosis not at first some university studies.as western christian think.
@@zachuram orthodox saints elders of our times such saint Paisios the athonite saint porohyrius the causocalivite saint iacodus of euvoia saint Ephrem of katounakia saint eumenius etc had not even finish the first grades at school but had better knowledge of God because they where Theoptes in the experience of Theosis.
@@zachuram you in the west have at first to overcome the methodologies you use, supposed to get knowledge, for the divine. No analogia entis or analogia fidei can drive anyone to the actual knowledge and union with God's majestic Uncreated Glory that is THEOSIS.
I've tried searching put do you have a link to your teaching on Matthew 7 and fruit. I would love to listen. Thanks!
it comes up a tiny bit in the "one big argument for Protestantism" video
What’s ur take on Galatians ch 1 in regards to the Gospel that the apostle preached vs the later added dogmas? I’ve been disappointed with the reverence in modern evangelical church and have been studying the older faiths but can’t get past Galatians ch 1.
It's a verse that should really keep all of us accountable to what we teach. If your goal is to please man by warping the gospel (removing repentance and sin from the equation being a common progressive protestant example). Those in leadership roles are held to a higher standard. I do view this idea that someone who loves God and even loves His law regarding sin and repentance can be hell bound for rejecting a certain tradition that has nothing to do with salvation as something that Paul would be referencing in this verse as well. Just as sternly as I condemn Protestants that warp the gospel.
Thx for the reply. My concern is if galatians 1 teaches to adhere to the teachings that the disciples had preached, any tradition that follows must be clearly taught in scripture. Especially if that tradition limits salvation to those that follow that tradition.
As i understand traditions in orthodoxy and catholicism, certain traditions MUST be believed in order to be apart of that faith tradition(ie. marian dogmas, venerations of saints).
If those traditions limit people to come to God through Christ, that seems contrary to paul’s teaching. No tradition should limit who can come to Christ that is not clearly seen in scripture, most importantly a tradition that limits peoples ability to come to Christ.
Thx for the reply. One of my friends is actually an orthodox priest in the Antiochian diocese, and we have visited the church multiple times. It’s beautiful and its reverence so I have a lot of respect for those older faiths, but just have a real hard time getting past the ease at which people in the Bible can come to Christ Versus traditions that limit people. I hope that makes sense Please take no offense to my comments.
Being a cradle Catholic who converted to evangelical in my 30's, I find this discussion extraordinary. It seems that any institutional '"church" is doomed to be corrupted by "the traditions of men". To me, Maryology is the most obvious of these corruptions. Any dogma which proposes that any created being can augment the salvation of Christ is another gospel.
Layers upon layers of idolatry through the centuries. If you follow his word Jesus and the Father will make their abode in you. The rest will work itself out.
You have no understanding as to how Marian devotion brings us closer to her son!
Why would you not venerate a very special woman who had to be immaculately conceived to bear Jesus, is the new Eve, the Ark of the New Covenant, Queen of Heaven & is the woman of Rev 12. No human is more worthy of our gratitude
Venerate yes! Pray to, no. Whoever you pray to, you worship. That honor is reserved for God alone. All the attributes you mention were "added" to mother Mary in later centuries as the tradition developed. Nothing in the scripture or the early church fathers indicates Mary was part of Christian theology. The whole concept of the incarnation is that believers have direct access to God through Christ. There is no longer a need for a "middleman". We have direct access to God through Him. "For there is One God, and One mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus" (1Tim2:5) One mediator. And the mediator is Himself God in the flesh! Furthermore, if you are born again, the Holy Spirit lives IN YOU. God is no longer outside of us, but IN us as well. There can be no closer connection to God! Why would you want to complicate God's design?
@@lastchance8142 Yes when Catholics and Orthodox claim they venerate the saints or Mary, veneration and worship are a distinction without a difference. Want good luck fishing? Ask st. Andrew. Safe travels? St. Christopher. Want Jesus to answer your prayers? Ask the Queen Mother to motivate him. Ex-Catholic also.
@@robertwarner-ev7wpJesus and the Father will make their abode but not the Holy Spirit? This is something I often notice within Protestantism, the subordination of the Holy Spirit. He’s God yet He’s hardly ever mentioned. Lord have mercy
I have respect for the Orthodox Church in the way I have respect for the Amish. They represent a snapshot of a way of doing things at a significant point in time, namely the 7th-8th centuries, and they did not fall into the traps of the ages after that period. This gives them great legitimacy and makes them an important resource for navigating the pitfalls of our day. There certainly is a lot that they have held onto which Protestants would be wise to discover. However, this stagnation also makes it nearly impossible for them to retract, repent, reform. I'm not saying they are blind to all of their failures, but I am saying that they've backed themselves into an impasse position when it comes to recognizing the authenticity of the church outside their communion. A person can agree with everything but feel uncomfortable kissing and praying before icons, and that person is anathema according to the 8th council.
There are uncountable problems with Protestantism, but the ability to repent and reform are built into the structure. I think this is a positive for Protestantism.
All of our systems have glaring flaws. Very well said. The story of the Bible is the story of man getting it wrong time and time again.
“Repent” is at the heart of orthodoxy. It’s what you will constantly hear! Your point makes me think that you have injected Protestantism and it’s tenets into the EO context. They don’t see a need to reform!! Reform from what? To what? The assumption in your argument is then that Protestantism has found truth that orthodoxy lacks, and that until and unless it “repents” it will stay restricted and stagnate more. Interesting 🤔
@@TheB1nary I believe you've misunderstood my point. I do not see this issue as black and white as you assume I do. I also do not believe protestantism has "found" something which EO hasn't. I was speaking to differences in the structure of the organization.
There is a rigidness to the view EO has of itself, not EO people, but the institution. If the institution needed to repent, how could it? If it needed to say, "You know, we realize that we have gone beyond the teaching of the apostles and the fathers, we have narrowed the way beyond the Lord's word, we have gone astray and put boundaries to the church which didn't belong. We have condemned when we should have accepted. We have put unnecessary burdens on the sheep of the Lord's flock."
How could they do that without first coming to grips with a possibility that they may have erred in their doctrine, something that only happens on Orthodoxy when 1. A saint opposes the church and is rejected but somehow God vindicated him. Or 2. An ecumenical council votes on it.
@@lucduchien Exactly. The orthodox church teaches that the church cannot err but by doing that they back themselves in the corner.
Revelation shows that churches can err and that Jesus can even take their candlesticks. In Timothy, Paul talks about how all the churches in asia separated from him.
Protestantism has not just the advantage of admitting error, it also has the advantage of being decentralized. When a protestant church gets liberal or corrupt, the disease can never contaminate all of the other churches. Rome on the other hand is very centralized, all Satan has to do is corrupt the top and it trickles down to the rest. You can see that directly with Pope Francis.
Protestantism tends towards the Spirit of the age(s). Isn't that a worse problem then clinging to tradition? It's allows for the resurgence of old heresies or the birth of new ones, without offering a way through them. Pastors and their flock are left to discern for themselves, not as a body, the will of God.
Which canons in the Orthodox Church claim that all outside the church are damned? All I can find are recent quotations of people saying that that is not the case. I'm trying to debate w/ a friend and would like to use primary sources.
Blessings!
On issue 1. Interesting. My dad was an Orthodox Priest who converted from Anglicanism, and he was very conservative, but believed that while we should fear hell, that the concept of eternal punishment was contrary to God's nature, and that God had a plan for the salvation of everyone. He also believed that while the Eastern Orthodox Church constituted the Church and that salvation was through the Church, that that didn't mean that protestants, or pagans or atheists couldn't go to heaven, just that their salvation was made POSSIBLE by the existence of the True Church whether by the prayers of the Church for those outside the Church, or because the Church is the real doorway to the Kingdom of God and so everyone is going to eventually walk into heaven through the Church, if they do. Also, Orthodoxy does not have the same concept of mortal sins (or a concept of sin at ALL) like the Roman Catholic Church. Sinning is swerving or stumbling off of the path as you carry your cross, and JUSTIFICATION (unlike in the west where it came to mean being made square with the law, or with debt) means being made to stand upright and walk the right path. Justification in Greek means to be straightened out, not to have your debts covered.
All Orthodox are absolved after death (except those who committed suicide out of despair for whom we leave it to God, but Jesus gave the Church the power to lose and bind. Unlike Roman Catholicism, Orthodoxy is not capable of making absolute statements that would utterly prevent anyone from passing through purification. I won't speak for the Church here, except to say that the Church is somewhat mute on the mystery. Keep in mind that we believe that salvation is the path, not the destination, and so salvation is the process of trying every day to walk the path of God's will, and Baptism or initiation is clearly not required as we are taught by the Good Thief, as well as the 40th Martyr of Sebaste.
I will take the time to watch both of these videos though, I haven't had a chance to watch all of each one yet.
Bizarre the things people concoct in their heads.
Ex-orthodoxy to Protestant
#subscribed
Praise God.
Ex-heterodox turned Christian.
That is a more apt description.
@@malachi7948 actually he went against the ecclesia that is actually Jesus Christ
Which Holy Eucharist you participate in now.Because the Lord said he that does not eat his flesh and drinks his blood has no eternal life
Hah, the exact opposite, and I couldn't be happier.
@@user-pj7sq7ce1f I am sure you must be immortal and a needle can't pierce your body as well since you eat the literal flesh and drink the literal blood that gives Eternal life. Since we are at it, does the bread and wine goes digestion and excretion ? If it does, that means everyone partakes in it, since water is recycled and it goes everywhere.
We need a part 3. I'm a protestant monastic looking into orthodoxy, how does the evangelical church view confession, confessing sins one to another? Please have him back! Very grateful for these interviews
Dr. Ortlund, You mentioned falsified documents in Nicaea 2? Could you please help me locate some more refences on this subject? I have a fiend who recently joined the Eastern Orthodox Church and I'm trying to explain to him how Iconography was in no way a tradition of the apostles. He's hung up on the idea that the 7 councils cannot be wrong.
Sacred Iconography predates the apostles, and historically it is clear that images were in churches p and that the saints were venerated. These are undeniable.
Thanks!
This was a great conversation. Very edifying. I consider myself a High Church Evangelical, I hold many positions of Lutherans and Anglicans but I really enjoy the community built around Evangelical churches. Thankfully the Church that I go has Communion every service 🙏🏼 so I can reconcile that bit somewhat. But it has always bugged me that there is this need for establishing the one true Church. I prefer following the one true God, his Word (Living and Written) and let that guide me through the Truth.
I love Church History, I love Patristics, Philosophy and Theology. But the more I learn about them the more I realize how much our sin and ignorance permeat in each Confession, solidified as Tradition. I also see God's Love and Truth in each Confession, solidified as Tradition as well. Therefore instead of judging them I take what is edifying and rebuke what I see as incorrect. I know that the argument would be that I become my own Pope or Magisterium, which granted it's a fair argument. But I see the divisions within Catholicism and Orthodoxy that I cannot help but see the contradictory aspects of that argument as well.
The One true Church was established over 2000 years ago
A great book to read regarding Pastor Schooping's comments starting at 7:00 is Leonard Verduin's "Reformers and their Step Children", a magisterial (no pun intended) examination of sacralism and its (deleterious) effects on the church.
Your content is amazing. Praise Jesus you share this. It help so much in learning and then knowing what to look up so I can help free our catholic and orthodox brothers and sisters who have been so yoked by traditions of man distracting them from the true belief in Jesus.
Pastor, I submit that you are very much an intellectual, being more in your mind than your heart. Like many “educated” Orthodox in the west you are living through the carnal mind and not through the heart purified by divine grace. I have been to school many years as well and have been down that road of Catholicism, Protestantism, and evangelicalism and have experienced it as but carnal dross in contrast to the living word that is the heart of Orthodoxy.