I loved the orthodox and still admire them but was confused by these things with prayers to saints etc and your talks sent me to Lutheran church. My whole family was baptized and confirmed in January this year. Thank you Lcms Des peres MO
While at my last church I had to move out of state, and then had a couple other moves between then and now. I went to many churches and it still took me almost 25 yrs. to finally find a good, confessional Lutheran church to attend on a regular basis. I found one in the past year and I finally feel like I'm home again, but I was having such a hard time finding a good liturgical church I was getting frustrated and I was considering RCIA because while I'm not on board w/ a lot of what RC teaches, they were closest to the LCMS than all other Protestant denominations and all other Lutheran synods outside of Missouri or Wisconsin, and as much as I didn't want to, Catholicism was literally better than nothing and I needed to find a home for my spiritual growth.
The first issue is the Paraklesis. Such a thing takes a lot of rationalizing away (in the name of context/paradigm mind tricks) to get past this, if you're honest with your conscience. The second issue is, if you ever survey or listen to EO priests try to explain the Gospel, they really can't do it simply or consistently. Many EO even recoil if you say the words, "Jesus died for our sins." What???!!! At least Lutherans can explain the Gospel clearly in line with how St. Paul clearly taught it. Christ crucified for us and risen again - justification by faith apart from works. The third issue was how horribly Martin Luther is mischaracterized or lumped with Calvin or others whenever many "educated" EO priests comment on the subject. If they can be so clearly mistaken on really basic history, how wrong are they on other basics? It's the Gospel of the Cross which Paul explained so clearly with so much ink that is paramount. You have to be able to say without reservation or qualification: "Jesus died for the sins of the whole world and we are justified by faith apart from works." Begin there and find whoever is closest, even if they don't sing/dance like old Lutherans. The LSB has at least one Calvary Chapel hymn and a ton of Wesleyan hymns. We'll be OK!
Old Lutherans were not against dancing and certainly not against singing. If you read Walther's Tanz und Theaterbusch, he is very clear that the only "dance" he (with 17th century orthodox lutherans) opposes is sex-mixed French dancing, and rightly so.
This may be a late comment but I’m going to put it in anyway. Check out a book called “Disillusioned” by a former Eastern Orthodox priest who lately became Luthern names Fr. Joshua Schooping, he also has a youtube channel so check that out as well!
1. I don't have any problems with it. 2. That's not true at all. 3. I don't have any praise for him, clearly heretical. But I'll leave it at that. 4. You're completely ignoring the incarnation and the ascension. All three are extremely important.
@@KillerofGods 1. You have no problem with the language there because you rationalize it away. 2. Yes, it's true. I spent a decade hearing EO priests unable to simply convey the Gospel. Thomas Hopko might be an exception, but that was in his later podcasts and then he passed away. 3. I'm not talking about praise, but level of knowledge amongst those who try to criticize him. At least understand what he taught before trying to counter it. Most EO are low on the knowledge level and just repeat what others say. 4. I'm not ignoring the incarnation or ascension. The incarnation led to the atonement. Christ said that is why He came into the world. The ascension is the returning back from where the Bread of Life came. He gave His Life on the Cross and rose again and ascended, but the primary mission was the Cross. The centrality of the atonement and what Paul taught about it is obscured in Eastern Orthodoxy. Those who have tasted this peace in Christ's Gospel should never seek to exchange it for something less clear. It is the power of God.
The Church has the divine guarantee to teach Christ's truth concerning the Written and Oral Tradition, both of which come from the Church. "The church is the pillar and foundation of the truth" (1Tim 3;15) and not the private interetations of an individual/group. Both the Protestant sects and the Orthodox churches put their own rendering of Apostolic Tradition above the final authority of the Catholic Church.
@@libatonvhs How does the Church determine what is apostolic tradition and what is not? The same way it determined which books were apostolic tradition and which books were not. Sola Scriptura however provides thousands of versions of doctrinal "truth" and continual division. The practice is clearly of Satan. Christ said to Peter and the apostles and their successors "He who hears you, hears me", and NOT "He who hears the private interpretations of the written Word, hears me".
@@DD-bx8rb The church keeps the Word, in the same way Pharisees kept it. Doesn't mean they were inerrant or that they could bind the consciences of believers with new traditions (Mark 7:7-13). Jesus warned us of false teachers (Matthew 7:15) and Paul says that even if he, an apostle, were to preach a different gospel, he should be anathemized (Galatians 1:6-9). Which means that the only way to see whether a given teaching or practice is valid, is to compare it with the Word of Jesus and His Apostles. We cannot just trust the office of the teacher and believe in whatever the person who occupies it says. The church is not inerrant - it never was, despite the fact it preserved the Scriptures (like the Pharisees). What makes us disciples of Christ is abiding in His word, not blindly submitting to some religious authority (John 8:31). God bless.
@@libatonvhs The authority of the pharisees was only an imperfect expression of the New Covenant. In the New Covenant Christ established His church on Peter and the apostles and their successor,s and guaranteed it would teach His truth, in His name, in every generation, until the end. Scripture is guaranteed but the private interpetations of individuals/groups are NOT. "The church is the pillar and foundation of the truth"(1 Tim 3:15). Your assertion "the only way to see whether a given teaching or practice is valid, is to compare it with the Word" is proven to be false because every Protestant sect that "studies the Bible under the Holy Spirit" arrives at different doctrinal conclusions and there is continual division. Sola Scriputra is simply a flawed tradition of men.
Maybe this came up because I used to be a Lutheran before my conversion to the Catholic Church. The veneration of Mary comes from plain theology. If Jesus became Man through Mary, then He comes to us through Mary. We have a relationship with God because Jesus is Man. He has united Himself to us through His humanity & the person in which He shares flesh is Mary. Therefore, we can ask Mary to bring us to her Son in a redemptive manner. Eve brought Adam the fruit and now Mary, the New Eve brings us to the Fruit of Her Womb & of the Cross (Tree). Btw, there’s lots of material error in the Augsburg confession. One very misleading one is the quote of St. Gregory the Great on the universal Bishop to say the Pope is the antichrist. St. Gregory the Great was literally the Pope. By universal Bishop he meant a man claiming to be the only Bishop while all the other Bishops are just his deputies. The Catholic Church has never taught that the Pope is the only valid Bishop. He’s one Bishop of many who has Authority to Teach & Govern the Church. At the end of the day, a Lutheran should become an Apostolic Christian because of what the meaning of “Apostolic” means in the Creed. If Lutherans do not mean “Apostolic Succession” when they say “Apostolic” in the Creed then they are changing the meaning of the word and holding to a new Creed. The Bible & all the Fathers teach that in order to be in the True Church, one needs a Bishop (in Communion with the Bishop of Rome). Clearly observed as Paul lays hands on Timothy & Titus making them Bishops.
@@berniepfitzner487 the Catechism of the Catholic Church states that only God can forgive sins (1441 in Catechism). The Bible shows that the Apostles receive the power to bind & loose from Jesus, the power to forgive sins, which is an authority granted by God to exercise in His Name. Peter is shown to be the Primate in many circumstances. He represents the Apostles on many occasions and is given special commissions by Jesus to tend to the Flock of God. Then, we know what the early Christians believed because the disciples of the Apostles, like St. Ignatius, Polycarp, and Clement of Rome were all Bishops and attest to Apostolic Succession. St. Ignatius even says “Ignatius . . . to the church also which holds the presidency, in the location of the country of the Romans, worthy of God, worthy of honor, worthy of blessing, worthy of praise, worthy of success, worthy of sanctification, and, because you hold the presidency in love, named after Christ and named after the Father” (Letter to the Romans 1:1 [A.D. 110]). It is worth looking into.
@@lifematterspodcast it wasn’t my opinions but the Truth of the RCC! Society is that no one wants to do their own research and read the Bible themselves! I don’t ever give scripture because people need to read the Bible themselves! And I won’t argue over scripture! And there is no scripture that RC can show that Peter said he is the Pope! Because Peter was dead at the time RC added the name Roman. He did call people who venerated others heretics and there is no church who venerates others like the RC do today! In the 10 Commandments the first or some read as 2nd ( numbering doesn’t matter but words don’t change) make no graven images of anything that is like heaven, on the earth or under the earth! But the RC ignores that because that means no statues that resemble any human being ( also any creatures)! That’s why they removed it from their Catholic Bible. They will tell you they wrote the First Bible. Another lie. The First Bible was the Ethiopian Bible written 65 years before and they removed over 15 books ( although Revelation says not to) and also the Jewish people had the OT before but the RC want all the credit! Pride.
I loved the orthodox and still admire them but was confused by these things with prayers to saints etc and your talks sent me to Lutheran church. My whole family was baptized and confirmed in January this year. Thank you Lcms Des peres MO
I've heard people say similar things about the trinity. Or Christ's two nature's.
While at my last church I had to move out of state, and then had a couple other moves between then and now. I went to many churches and it still took me almost 25 yrs. to finally find a good, confessional Lutheran church to attend on a regular basis. I found one in the past year and I finally feel like I'm home again, but I was having such a hard time finding a good liturgical church I was getting frustrated and I was considering RCIA because while I'm not on board w/ a lot of what RC teaches, they were closest to the LCMS than all other Protestant denominations and all other Lutheran synods outside of Missouri or Wisconsin, and as much as I didn't want to, Catholicism was literally better than nothing and I needed to find a home for my spiritual growth.
"Waking up from an enchantment" is a good way to put it. Very accurate and well said.
Thank you for reposting these . They are excellent ! I never heard this before and learned much .
The first issue is the Paraklesis. Such a thing takes a lot of rationalizing away (in the name of context/paradigm mind tricks) to get past this, if you're honest with your conscience.
The second issue is, if you ever survey or listen to EO priests try to explain the Gospel, they really can't do it simply or consistently. Many EO even recoil if you say the words, "Jesus died for our sins." What???!!! At least Lutherans can explain the Gospel clearly in line with how St. Paul clearly taught it. Christ crucified for us and risen again - justification by faith apart from works.
The third issue was how horribly Martin Luther is mischaracterized or lumped with Calvin or others whenever many "educated" EO priests comment on the subject. If they can be so clearly mistaken on really basic history, how wrong are they on other basics?
It's the Gospel of the Cross which Paul explained so clearly with so much ink that is paramount. You have to be able to say without reservation or qualification: "Jesus died for the sins of the whole world and we are justified by faith apart from works." Begin there and find whoever is closest, even if they don't sing/dance like old Lutherans. The LSB has at least one Calvary Chapel hymn and a ton of Wesleyan hymns. We'll be OK!
Old Lutherans were not against dancing and certainly not against singing. If you read Walther's Tanz und Theaterbusch, he is very clear that the only "dance" he (with 17th century orthodox lutherans) opposes is sex-mixed French dancing, and rightly so.
😊😊😊😊
This may be a late comment but I’m going to put it in anyway.
Check out a book called “Disillusioned” by a former Eastern Orthodox priest who lately became Luthern names Fr. Joshua Schooping, he also has a youtube channel so check that out as well!
1. I don't have any problems with it.
2. That's not true at all.
3. I don't have any praise for him, clearly heretical. But I'll leave it at that.
4. You're completely ignoring the incarnation and the ascension. All three are extremely important.
@@KillerofGods
1. You have no problem with the language there because you rationalize it away.
2. Yes, it's true. I spent a decade hearing EO priests unable to simply convey the Gospel. Thomas Hopko might be an exception, but that was in his later podcasts and then he passed away.
3. I'm not talking about praise, but level of knowledge amongst those who try to criticize him. At least understand what he taught before trying to counter it. Most EO are low on the knowledge level and just repeat what others say.
4. I'm not ignoring the incarnation or ascension. The incarnation led to the atonement. Christ said that is why He came into the world. The ascension is the returning back from where the Bread of Life came. He gave His Life on the Cross and rose again and ascended, but the primary mission was the Cross.
The centrality of the atonement and what Paul taught about it is obscured in Eastern Orthodoxy. Those who have tasted this peace in Christ's Gospel should never seek to exchange it for something less clear. It is the power of God.
This ELCA Lutheran wants to know which Lutheran church are you discussing: ELCA or LCMS?
Misery Synod
@@richardsaintjohn8391Misery Synod vs ex-Lutheran support group, tuff
The Church has the divine guarantee to teach Christ's truth concerning the Written and Oral Tradition, both of which come from the Church. "The church is the pillar and foundation of the truth" (1Tim 3;15) and not the private interetations of an individual/group. Both the Protestant sects and the Orthodox churches put their own rendering of Apostolic Tradition above the final authority of the Catholic Church.
how do you determine which traditions are valid ?
@@libatonvhs How does the Church determine what is apostolic tradition and what is not? The same way it determined which books were apostolic tradition and which books were not. Sola Scriptura however provides thousands of versions of doctrinal "truth" and continual division. The practice is clearly of Satan. Christ said to Peter and the apostles and their successors "He who hears you, hears me", and NOT "He who hears the private interpretations of the written Word, hears me".
@@DD-bx8rb The church keeps the Word, in the same way Pharisees kept it. Doesn't mean they were inerrant or that they could bind the consciences of believers with new traditions (Mark 7:7-13). Jesus warned us of false teachers (Matthew 7:15) and Paul says that even if he, an apostle, were to preach a different gospel, he should be anathemized (Galatians 1:6-9). Which means that the only way to see whether a given teaching or practice is valid, is to compare it with the Word of Jesus and His Apostles. We cannot just trust the office of the teacher and believe in whatever the person who occupies it says. The church is not inerrant - it never was, despite the fact it preserved the Scriptures (like the Pharisees). What makes us disciples of Christ is abiding in His word, not blindly submitting to some religious authority (John 8:31). God bless.
@@libatonvhs The authority of the pharisees was only an imperfect expression of the New Covenant. In the New Covenant Christ established His church on Peter and the apostles and their successor,s and guaranteed it would teach His truth, in His name, in every generation, until the end. Scripture is guaranteed but the private interpetations of individuals/groups are NOT. "The church is the pillar and foundation of the truth"(1 Tim 3:15). Your assertion "the only way to see whether a given teaching or practice is valid, is to compare it with the Word" is proven to be false because every Protestant sect that "studies the Bible under the Holy Spirit" arrives at different doctrinal conclusions and there is continual division. Sola Scriputra is simply a flawed tradition of men.
Maybe this came up because I used to be a Lutheran before my conversion to the Catholic Church.
The veneration of Mary comes from plain theology. If Jesus became Man through Mary, then He comes to us through Mary. We have a relationship with God because Jesus is Man. He has united Himself to us through His humanity & the person in which He shares flesh is Mary.
Therefore, we can ask Mary to bring us to her Son in a redemptive manner. Eve brought Adam the fruit and now Mary, the New Eve brings us to the Fruit of Her Womb & of the Cross (Tree).
Btw, there’s lots of material error in the Augsburg confession. One very misleading one is the quote of St. Gregory the Great on the universal Bishop to say the Pope is the antichrist. St. Gregory the Great was literally the Pope. By universal Bishop he meant a man claiming to be the only Bishop while all the other Bishops are just his deputies. The Catholic Church has never taught that the Pope is the only valid Bishop. He’s one Bishop of many who has Authority to Teach & Govern the Church.
At the end of the day, a Lutheran should become an Apostolic Christian because of what the meaning of “Apostolic” means in the Creed. If Lutherans do not mean “Apostolic Succession” when they say “Apostolic” in the Creed then they are changing the meaning of the word and holding to a new Creed. The Bible & all the Fathers teach that in order to be in the True Church, one needs a Bishop (in Communion with the Bishop of Rome). Clearly observed as Paul lays hands on Timothy & Titus making them Bishops.
The Bible does not say that a Bishop is valid because he is in communion with Rome.
@@berniepfitzner487 the Catechism of the Catholic Church states that only God can forgive sins (1441 in Catechism).
The Bible shows that the Apostles receive the power to bind & loose from Jesus, the power to forgive sins, which is an authority granted by God to exercise in His Name.
Peter is shown to be the Primate in many circumstances. He represents the Apostles on many occasions and is given special commissions by Jesus to tend to the Flock of God.
Then, we know what the early Christians believed because the disciples of the Apostles, like St. Ignatius, Polycarp, and Clement of Rome were all Bishops and attest to Apostolic Succession.
St. Ignatius even says “Ignatius . . . to the church also which holds the presidency, in the location of the country of the Romans, worthy of God, worthy of honor, worthy of blessing, worthy of praise, worthy of success, worthy of sanctification, and, because you hold the presidency in love, named after Christ and named after the Father” (Letter to the Romans 1:1 [A.D. 110]).
It is worth looking into.
@@mpkropf5062 can you give me your sources for Peter being against those things? Your church started 1500 years after Jesus.
@@mpkropf5062 Instead of putting forth an argument or substantial support for your opinions you just say “read this” and then say opinions.
@@lifematterspodcast it wasn’t my opinions but the Truth of the RCC! Society is that no one wants to do their own research and read the Bible themselves! I don’t ever give scripture because people need to read the Bible themselves! And I won’t argue over scripture! And there is no scripture that RC can show that Peter said he is the Pope! Because Peter was dead at the time RC added the name Roman. He did call people who venerated others heretics and there is no church who venerates others like the RC do today! In the 10 Commandments the first or some read as 2nd ( numbering doesn’t matter but words don’t change) make no graven images of anything that is like heaven, on the earth or under the earth! But the RC ignores that because that means no statues that resemble any human being ( also any creatures)! That’s why they removed it from their Catholic Bible. They will tell you they wrote the First Bible. Another lie. The First Bible was the Ethiopian Bible written 65 years before and they removed over 15 books ( although Revelation says not to) and also the Jewish people had the OT before but the RC want all the credit! Pride.