Well, Austin this may sound a bit strange. As a soon to be 70 year old watching your interviews and questions prodded me to dig deeper. I am becoming a student of the early Desert Fathers&Mothers. I’m in the midst of taking an online course on Patristics. I was just a Bible nerd for the prior 15 years. Now I can add, a student of the Desert Fathers. Thank you for your role in this new twist in my Spiritual Life. Live for Jesus!
same dilemma . I'm in my 40s and grew up in a very anti-Catholic Protestant denomination. I've been investigating both the Orthodox Church of America and Roman Catholicism. After a few months, I believe that I'll be joining the Catholic Church.
@@bryent7420 Throughout Catholic history there have been many good & saintly popes as well as some bad popes. However, protected by the Holy Spirit, none of the bad popes ever officially taught error. Pope Francis’s erroneous statements are his personal opinion.
@@bryent7420How do you line up the Kings of Judah who didn't line up with God's commandment? Did that invalidate the Davidic line? Did God suddenly demand that the Messiah would not come from the Tribe of Judah anymore? Do you realize that King Manasseh was an ancestor of Jesus?
Hey Austin, I really relate to what you said about taking a leap - after a 10 year journey of deconstruction out of Evangelicalism and then exploration of the apostolic churches, I realised that merely evaluating the data couldn't fully and finally clinch the result. My subjective experience is that God led me into the Catholic Church, but I'm very sympathetic towards those who go to Orthodoxy or stay Protestant, because (in my opinion) at the end of the day your fundamental assumptions will form the interpretive famework you use to evaluate each respective truth claim. I really appreciate your thoughtfulness, and your commitment to church attendance, prayer and leading your wife throughout this often difficult journey is inspiring brother! God bless 🙏
This is so well said. I understand that recognizing some of the subjectivity here makes some people uncomfortable, but, to me, it just seems so much more honest.
12:59 I have the exact same prayer. It's VERY comforting to know you have this exact tug on your heart as well. I feel so alone. I have the same devotional and Sunday situation and I have absolutely no idea what to do about it! God bless you friend 🙏🏼❤ thank you for your channel, I love it!
I had been trying out many churches with my son. He hated going to churches until we happened upon an Orthodox Church. He said he never wanted to go anywhere else. And I admit, I felt a warmth in my heart upon leaving the liturgy. I didn’t know about all the internet drama. 😂
I’m Charismatic and use the Jesus Prayer and also a modified version of the Rosary. Love that you’re exploring other traditions alongside your non-denominational church. 👍 Whatever spiritual disciplines and practices help bring you continually closer to God and make more space for Him in your life. Great channel.
Just finished watching the entire video. Excellent stuff, Austin. I really benefit from the question/answer sessions. Many of the questions raised cover important topics and your answers, although relatively brief, helped stimulate my thoughts about these topics. Thanks again!
@@a.ihistory5879 That's not official Orthodox teaching, but what is for Catholics is watering down every single sacrement; sprinkle babies instead of immersing, not giving children comunion, not fasting properly on Wednesdays and Fridays, only taking half of communion not both hosts, priests facing the crowd like Protestants instead of the sancutary in liturgy, novos ordo, weak monastic rules, the list goees on. Wake up and realise that Catholicism isn't what it used to be, it is just a watered down version of its former self. Only Holy Orthodoxy is unchanged.
Austin, the more I listen to you in this context, the more I wish we had overlapped more at Moody and could have had these conversations in person. I’d be 10x smarter for it. Blessings!
I'm sure that would've been good fun! I'll always cherish my time at Moody where talking about these things with friends over dinner was a daily occurrence.
Every time I watch this channel it reminds me my period in non-Christian Eastern traditions where everybody is a seeker and people are constantly adjusting their practices to their personal preferences. It’s still interesting to hear your perspective. Thanks.
Same here! I went from Baptist/Non-denominational theology to reformed Baptist, and then to LCMS Lutheran 😊. I was just confirmed this past reformation Sunday. The spark for me leaving Evangelicalism was simply reading about the Lord's Supper in the gospels.
Would definitely be interested in hearing more about your deconstruction journey! Granted, I had to dip after about the 45-min mark (so maybe you got more into it later). I can relate to "deconstructing" and then reconstructing my faith, so I'd be interested to hear more about that experience. As always, I appreciate listening to your thoughts!
Wow, I remember seeing your experiences going to mass video and our few dialogues we had. That was four years ago, wow time flies. Well continued blessing to you and your wife.
If you have already looked through history and still unsettled them take a pause and let the Holy sprit take over. At the end of the day, if you feel you are in the right place as a Christian without a doubt in your mind, then just practice according to the practice of your faith with all your being. Trying to overanalyze things will get you nowhere. God bless you on your spiritual journey
In the songs leading up to the Eucharist in the Orthodox Liturgy, the word ‘sacrifice’ is a ‘sacrifice of praise’. Sacrifices don’t have to be where our mind goes, to blood sacrifices. In the Liturgy there is a mutual giving of ourselves to God and He gives Himself to us.
It's great that you're now reading/studying thru the great books/classics Aristotle/Plato/etc in your post-grad studies; you would have covered these as the basics in an undergrad at a good Catholic college (Christendom), so you're catching up! ;)
My degrees are kind of flip-flopped in that my first was very specialized (Latin, Greek, 100 credit hours of Bible/Theology), whereas my Master's is now very broad
Thanks for sharing your answers to some great and important questions, Austin. Like you, I see a lot of Christians online look for a more liturgical and traditional denomination. However, I don't personally know anyone who is doing this.
Thank you, Austin! I always appreciate your grace and how you navigate all these topics! I’m an Orthodox convert and have no desire to be otherwise, but I feel like I gain so much from hearing other perspectives (even from the Prot/Evangelical world I used to be in) in such respectful dialogues.
One of the things I have noticed about Catholicism (I'm RC) is that there are lots of devotional practices / spiritualities / and forms of worship (from charismatic to traditional Latin) that is sort of similar to protestanism - ie there is space for a lot of choice about how to pray / worship whilst remaining in a communion that isn't divided in the way protestanism is- we all share same doctrine and obedience to magesterium. A world wide communion with a recognisable leader to the nations, also seems to be particular. A Jewish friend who visited the Vatican said that 'the whole world enters here'. I have to say that I am strongly drawn to Orthodoxy. What I have just described is probably what would keep me Catholic eventhough I also see it as a weakness of our church....
Hello Austin, I think that @Scholastic Answers or Christian B. Wagner have the answers to your questions. Your conversation with Dr. Barnabas Aspray was interesting, and I think a more scholastic perspective would be enlightening. Please consider having Christian on to discuss things. Thank you and God bless you.
Hi, Austin. Is it possible to interview a Japanese American artist (Makoto Fujimura, Reformed Christian), author of Silence and Beauty? Fujimura, an Evangelical, delves deeply into the famous work "Silence" by Shusaku Endo, one of the leading Catholic writers of the 20th century, in this book.
I love your channel. The apostolic succession issue is one I try to understand. If more people study church history, they will see the reformation didn't just happen out of nowhere. Your channel introduced me to Dr. Ortlund. His video about Estifanos of Ethiopia was eye opening. These debates were happening all over Christendom for centuries. We don't know because most of what we hear is about what was going on in major hubs of the Roman Empire. I appreciate your thoroughness.
Being anti-contraception was Protestant orthodoxy until around 1930. All of the Reformers actually found contraceptives morally reprehensible. I grew up in a Protestant family where my parents (one Lutheran, one Wesleyan) did not use birth control. I am unaware of how common or uncommon that is. Certainly, Evangelicals have often railed against any form of contraception that is in any way abortifacient (which narrows the range of licit methods considerably). My wife and I, by the way, used NFP in order to GET pregnant!
That's all it's ever been about. Denominations are like football teams, people will always argue about who is better. If everyone sat aside their differences and called out all the evil bs the governments of the world is doing, they'd be powerless.
Thanks for answering my question about the episcopacy. I agree-Ignatius’s words on the Bishop are hard to get around. I’m Reformed with leanings toward Anglicanism, but like you, am married and am comfortably attending a Presby Church. Thanks again-cheers!
The search for the Truth is never comfortable however, very much worth the effort! His Truth is found only in His One True Church ie Catholicism which has existed for 2000 yrs, the longest lasting institution, proof of her divine origin!
@9:30 if St Ignatius of Antioch says the bishop is in the place of God and that where the bishop is there is the Church, how can bishops be unnecessary for a church to be a church @10:00? God bless!
I only noticed the live stream as it was going on and joined later. There was a thing I wanted to ask you: Have you ever considered making similar content, but talking to atheists and agnostics? Certainly, there would be scope for discussing some deep questions about how we underpin our beliefs and make our choices. This from a lapsing agnostic/atheist who's unsure where to go next.
@@GospelSimplicity @Austin do you feel since you started your journey that you've grown as a stronger protestant or that there seems to be some truth over on the Catholic and Orthodox side that just needs to be understood more or vice versa? Your Catholic brother Robert from Puerto Rico 🇵🇷
St Polycarp endorses all of St Ignatius’ letters, and especially his letter to the Philadelphians. And 1 Clement ch 40-45 clearly articulates apostolic succession and the office of the episcopate as well. Alongside St Dionysius, these early fathers all clearly affirm the 3 fold office of bishopric over priest over deacon.
I‘m in a similar situation. I‘m in Bowie Md and as far as theology goes I’d probably attend a WELS Lutheran church I would attend near me but my wife and I love the Baptist church we are members of and she wouldn’t be happy leaving it
I just can’t get over what I’ve come to view as a self-refuting or implausible doctrine (depending on the version) which is sola scriptura. I think even if Catholicism requires one to adopt some questionable historical claims, which one could argue it does, it at least does not depend on an incoherent claim being true. I believe in the resurrection of Christ with a firm conviction, so my Christianity has to be expressed somewhere. I believe that if Christ is indeed risen he would give us a source of unity and clarity and for this reason I am going to be “swimming the Tiber” this year. And yes I understand it is not the only apostolic tradition, but it gets more complicated regarding those.
@ if scripture, the Protestant 66 book Bible, contains every doctrine that is binding on the Christian (this is how Westminster and most common confessions define it) and Sola Scriptura is a doctrine that is binding on every Christian, then it must be contained within scripture (66 books of the Protestant Bible). But Sola Scriptura is not contained within the Protestant Bible, therefore it is not a doctrine that is binding on all Christians. We see by adopting Sola Scriptura, we refute Sola Scriptura, the doctrine falls under its own weight. We can see that none of the Christians in the first couple of centuries would have understood any of the verses that Protestants point to as teaching Sola Scriptura as actually teaching Sola Scriptura because they did not practice it, therefore the historical-grammatical hermeneutic (interpreting scripture according to how it would have been received by its original audience) which is another necessary aspect of Sola Scriptura, prevents us from interpreting these verses as supporting Sola Scriptura. Other rules of faith are also needed to establish the biblical cannon which are not found in scripture. If these rules are not binding, then one is free to question any book of the Bible and can no longer rely on the Bible in as strong of a sense as Sola Scriptura would require, because it is now merely a fallible list of infallible books.
I have to say, Austin, you seem to speak about the Catholic Church as it is another denomination among many, but it truly is the visible Church Jesus established.
Congratulations on your achievement, Austin! So much deserved, my friend! If I can give you any counsel whatsoever, I’d say you shouldn’t expose yourself too much to public curiosity at this point, even knowing you (more or less) became a public figure online. Maybe your wife needs more discrete steps in her (and the couple’s) faith journey! I’m not even suggesting you should not inform the public if you convert or if you don’t, but that you should be more cautious and silent during whatever process you and your family are into, in order to enjoy genuine peace! More so, I’d recommend you get some “Catholic polemicism” (I know you most certainly consumed more Catholic than Orthodox material at this point, so I’m not talking in general) and not only Catholic diverse theology readings. I’m talking specifically about polemical features like the “papacy” and “the Filioque” under the lenses of both history and theology. I’m saying that because it can be easy to get trapped to the side of polemics of Eastern Orthodoxy (or Protestants, for that matter) if one side is obstinately accusative and the other one has to do all the job to be adequately defensive: first, because they are more numerous in works (try to see “Filioque” and count how many articles and books one can find from Orthodox angle and how many from Catholic angle in English), as the adversarial nature of their stance on those issues can be quite existential and almost identitarian; secondly, because even if one gets a general treatise of Eastern Orthodoxy’s theology or a book only making a general presentation of the Eastern Orthodox faith, in general it will eventually lead to anti-Catholic polemicism in the midst of it because Orthodoxy - more or less - defines itself in opposition just as much as (if not more) it does in direct proposition on these issues. As far as the papacy goes, sometimes I get the impression that you already mentally conceded that it is a sort of implicit “usurpation of power”, while I can naturally see, in all honesty, those denying that very authority as usurpers of God’s plan and design for the Church (and I’m not even exaggerating here: it’s just a matter of finding the correct words for the correct idea I would express). Why don’t you try to find a more neutral - if it’s even possible- “starting” approach while reading papal polemicist sources on the Catholic side, not only those more “ecumenical” but also those who can be strict in the Catholic defense from history and all theological sources, even loudly-spoken? Maybe you could read things related to the papacy (on Vatican I included, or specially) on the more polemical Catholic side without loading too much on the idea of “infallibility” as a prior commitment to the investigation itself. Just two cents I can drop here ;) Take your time in the journey! Don’t make it an intellectual quest only. God bless your paths always!
This is a great video. You were part of my personal leap into Orthodoxy. Keep struggling, brother. Wherever you land, I'm confident that the Lord is with you.
Hey! I love the channel and was happy to see you mention Anglicanism. Around the 34:00 mark about how we don't see ourselves as the "One True Church". I would be happy to have a long form discussion about this. It is true that we don't see ourselves as the *only* branch of the Catholic Church, but for various reasons I do think it is safe to say that the Anglican view is that while a non-denom church may have a valid lay ministry (valid baptisms and preaching etc.) it is not a "True Church", and is sinfully in schism. Just because we don't claim to have a monopoly on being THE True Church does not mean that in our opinion any old group which claims to be a church without proper preaching AND right administration of the sacraments is a valid church. But still, I understand the point you were trying to make about the difficulty of leaving your current church and emphathise. It can definitely be hard sorting through these issues. Just wanted to clarify the Anglican view if possible. God bless!
The Anglican “Church” is history! Founded by Henry VIII, he murdered two wives & now in the UK, the Anglican “Church” is now the Anglican Community. In 1930, at the Lambeth Conference, the Anglican Church was the first to break with the ban on contraception & started on the slippery slope!
@@GospelSimplicity yeah but I mean because it's true those are obtainable, as opposed to forcing yourself to believe and you actually believing it, thinking it's true because you want to believe in it Those 2 points come together I guess (this reply and original comment)
After we have wrestled to the best of our ability, we need to pray/trust. Sounds simplistic but if our bottom line is to follow Jesus and be his disciple why shd we not pray that he would actually lead us to where he wants us to go?
Lutheranism became the answer for us after attending a more Pentecostal church. We found ourselves missing the liturgy, the actual and meaningful celebration of communion, and we grew weary of services that sometimes seemed to center on us or the preacher rather than on Christ. Studying what Lutheranism actually is and what the tradition says I was happily surprised as well. Also the hymns full of doctrines are so gangster. God bless you and the wifey on your journey brother!
Some might wonder - why not EO or RC? I don’t see the exclusivity, the anathemas over every minor detail (icons, calendars, Mary etc), and the occasional disdain for other Christian brothers and sisters found in these traditions reflected in the Bible (nor the early church). God bless!
Take your time, Austin! When and if a change must occur, you will be convicted and you will no longer be able to withstand it; that was my experience, anyhow. It occured after reading a short article on Orthodox Eschatology by Fr. Vassilios Papavassiliou - it was the straw that broke my Protestant back. I could no longer in good conscience continue on without attending the Orthodox Church. My Soul longed for it. Years of continuous, painstaking academic & theological research came to an end. It was time for me. My decision was not well received by my wife (to put it kindly) four years ago - we'd only been married for about a year - but glory to God, she will be Baptized along with our twin children at our local Antiochian Orthodox Church next month. Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy upon us.
@Joker22593 Joker's an apt name for you. Whether another baptism is needed is in the discretion of local Priest & Bishop based on a number of factors & on a case by case basis, as every situation is different.
@@Joker22593the creed acknowledges one legitimate baptism. If I sprinkle water on my own head and say a few words about christ or the trinity that doesn't entail a baptism, and neither does any protestant dunking. Only a very select few groups get to re enter the church by simple admission of faith. Everyone else at the very least needs their baptism completed through chrism.
During covid I went thru a huge deconstruction phase. You were one of the people that opened the idea of the EO church. After some exploration and contrasts, I saw so much fullness and beauty in the EO; and now a member. Please, please come visit St. Matthew in Columbia, MD. Its so close to you.
You might find The Lonely Man of Faith an interesting read. Jewish author with philosophical commentary on Genesis and our purpose. It’s short, basically an essay.
There is only one Baptism. Re-baptism is not a thing, it is impossible. It is not a re-baptism when it happens, it is a conditional baptism, just in case the first was invalid. Certainly when Orthodox do this it is to make absolutely sure the Chrismation and Communion are valid. Surely it is better to err on the side of caution. Each decision is unique and down to the local Bishop.
@ That’s a gravely incorrect take. If you say that the sacrament of Baptism does not imprint character (the “seal” or “σφραγίς”, as more usual in the Greek patrology), it would be contrary to the text of Mark 16, 16, if understood in its entirety. As said, _”Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned”:_ a baptized person can lose belief but a baptized person can never lose the seal of the baptized, if it was valid (regardless of if it was licit). Not only that. I think it is problematic to take that road because it will enter all over again the problem of rebaptism of heretics and the Donatist crisis: if baptism does not imprint character or the “seal” but only a diffuse episode of grace, whomever feels to arbitrate where grace is (like Donatists and crypto-Donatists of modern day) - meaning heretics can’t offer that nor any kind of seal -, then the position of always rebaptizing heretics that confer baptism as the Church does (correct form and matter, and in the name of the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit) would have prevailed. But it hasn’t. The Donatists were declared heretics and not the other way around. Pope St Stephen of Rome won over the discussion with St Cyprian of Carthage. The Fathers of Nicea have dealt with that SPECIFICALLY in two of its canons. And they simply attest that the dogmatic position of the Church of Rome prevailed in its canonical regulations. In *Canon 8* of Nicea, the Ecumenical Council decided that the Novatian heretics (they called themselves the “purists” or the ‘cathari’) - curiously enough, Novatianism was declared a heresy by the Church of Rome using the letters of St Cyprian of Carthage (!) - MUST NOT BE rebaptized when coming to the Church. In *Canon 19,* on the other hand, the Holy Ecumenical Council decided that Paulianist heretics (the followers of Paul of Samosata, also known as “Adopcionists”) MUST BE rebaptized when coming to the Church. What was the difference between one case (Novatianism) and the other (Adoptionism)? Although both groups were dogmatically declared heretics by the Popes and Ecumenical Councils, Adoptionists had to be rebaptized because they rejected the Most Holy Trinity. In this case rebaptism is unavoidably necessary. For a Catholic not only it is heresy to rebaptize “heretics” without further distinctions but it is also sacrilegious and disrespects the canons and the acts of the Ecumenical Council of Nicea. The oneness of baptism is not something to play with: since it is the only sign of sacramental unity amidst disunity, it will eventually lead to the oneness of faith again. Devil or “diablo” comes from the Greek word “dia-ballein”, which means the union of the word “dia”, that means the other side, across (like in ‘diagonal’) and “ballein”, that means to shoot, to aggressively push (like in ‘ballistic’). So the devil is the one to push to the other side what was united before; he is the one behind the multitude of baptisms as theatrical acts or of the Neo-Donatist heresy of these days, honestly. That’s a serious issue, a very serious one.
@@masterchief8179 The act of baptism in and of itself does not alter a person's relationship with God in any way. If we examine each and every example of baptism in the bible, we see this with Simon in Acts 8. Baptism in all it entails, which includes a message of faith, and includes the mercy and grace of God, then one is saved. There is not one single example in the bible, that backs up your view of baptism. Are you aware of this?
Hey Austin! Can you discuss about the Eucharist. Do you believe that the Eucharist is Christ Himself! John 6;53 "Very truly I tell you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have, no life in you.
@ it’s an MA. It’s a great books program which covers Literature, Philosophy and Theology, History, Politics and Society, and Mathematics and Natural Science. You can then choose a focus from there, which I’ve done and chosen Philosophy and Theology. You can find the core curriculum reading lists on their website!
@@GospelSimplicity Sweet! I didn't see much Camu and Kierkegaard listed in the program reading list are these ones part of your focus on Philosophy and Theology? Also thanks for your replies, this is my last question, I promise!
1:09:15 supporting a political party should have a lot to do with where you think the party is going or what drives and feeds it. In my opinion, leftism is rooted in Christianity and a rejection of its supernatural concepts. The whole thing falls apart over time and becomes a form of nihilism as things play out. A trend I see among leftists no matter where they exist on the spectrum is they see the Democrat Party as mostly aligned with their individual values with anything outside of that merely being an exception. None understand they will be (or already are) outcasts if they believe the same thing for decades because there is this thrust towards nihilism. At its worst, their relationship with ideas becomes a series of changing instructions to follow to maintain social acceptance, perceived superiority, and power.
I asked this before, but I wasn't sure if I got a good answer from those without a magistereum. If there's a place for this discussion where I won't be bothersome, point me to it! 1) If the magistereum of the Church gets something fatally wrong, we are morally obliged to separate from it. 2) Separating from the magistereum of the Church is an example of schism. 3) Schism is always a sin. 4) If the magistereum of the Church gets something wrong, we are morally obliged to sin. 5) We are never morally obliged to sin. C) It is not possible for the magistereum of the Church to get something fatally wrong. What would you say in response?
I don't think we are morally obliged to separate from the church, but simply deny the teaching in place of some higher teaching which may or may not be infallible.
@@whitevortex8323 I see. But, some teachings in the Catholic church are attached to an excommunication - to hold to them is to be excommunicated. Is it schismatic (for a member of an ecclesial church) to hold to these teachings, knowing that they constitute separation from the church?
2 or 3) is/are wrong, separation from a church that is fatally wrong is not schism. The assumption you've built into this is that the Church = the church, which given that the church is everyone in the body of Christ, which is all who have been baptised into Christ, is wrong. It's a circular argument.
I’m Catholic but I find it very lonely. I only started two years ago after cultural Catholic childhood and secular agnosticism. It’s very disheartening to see it as true but also see my parish as a desert. Meanwhile the nondenominational church is in a strip mask next to a wig store and has dinner fellowship and small groups and long teaching through the Bible. I’m so jealous and conflicted
Find a Catholic group that you can join for spiritual support & fellowship. I’ve been involved with the Marian Movement of Priests for 30 yrs which has helped develop my faith, go on great pilgrimages & make marvelous friends.
I’m not sure where you are but my Orthodox Church is thriving. I came from a Lutheran background and never expected to see such a full church. So many young people and families that we can’t fit the pews. Obviously this is probably not the norm everywhere in the country but maybe it’s something to look into?
I’m an evangelical and started attending daily mass at the cathedral here in Little Rock and mother parish near my home on Sundays. I don’t relate at all. Grass seems always greener on the other side. Go and experience the non-denominational church after mass. I attend both on Sundays and enjoy making a contrast. I’m in RCIA and will be baptized on Easter vigil as I was baptized at the age of 9 in with a Jesus-only baptism.
It is not a matter of Thomas not being smart, or that he is just smarter than you. The fact that he may not resonate with you is that he asks questions that you don't ask, and the tools he uses to craft an answer may not be the tools that anyone alive today might naturally deploy.
Have you watched the video “Catholicism: IRREFUTABLE Proof” (Clickbait title) from Scholastic Answers on TH-cam? The video gives a really good argument from the fittingness of the Catholic theological system in my opinion
@@GospelSimplicity Haha understandable. I only mention because you said you’re making a video about “arguments for churches that don’t exist” and that video actually has a section about that point from a Thomistic perspective, which might be interesting to you.
Very enjoyable! Good job my friend! So much of what you shared I also feel that ‘Christianity as a life we live and not just an idea in our head. Like Saint Basil says… Christ tells us clearly what we are to do, how to follow Him…but who wants listen these days?Be Baptized. Receive the Eucharist “Do this”. Take up your cross. Care for the poor, widows, fatherless and the stranger among you. Scripture says that many left Him because it was too hard, too much to ask. I think many come to that crossroads and don’t know what to do. I’m glad your program is here. a I encourage people to visit churches they’ve never been to and break the prejudices. People are still being disowned by families because of the Church they want to attend. ☦️
The truth is a person: Jesus the Messiah, Lord of All. Concepts, practices, sacraments, denominational structures exist to point us to him. Regardless of the sign on the door. It is for each person to deny self, and walk in the simple faith as did Abraham, trusting in the Lord for all things, and pointing others to his power and grace.
Dude! He is making vids about all kinds of fenomena in christendom. It does not indicate that in his private life of practicing christian he is sitting on the fence indefinitely.
@@JWM5791 Christ established a Church - none without Apostolic succession is HIS church, and as such you should decide to truly follow him. Only the Catholic and Orthodox Church has the true Body and Blood of Christ and consumes it like Christ demanded. Only the Catholic and Orthodox church has real confession etc.
I respectfully say that having the government take care of things such as the poor and everything else you said can be very weird. As the government taking money from you it’s not you giving it in the same sense as to charity. And the people receiving that aid do not see it as charity or something that they’re receiving at someone’s sacrifice. So really takes a lot of the good out of what charity is and should be.
I know you said you aren’t Anglican, but it sounds like you’re basically a High Church Re-formed (not reformed as in Calvinism but literally re-formed) Anglican. Although, Anglicanism is a big umbrella so it’s not a totally fair assessment lol.
@@MikeM-cz5ln What matters is the person's relationship with Jesus, not the history of the church. I've done a lot of studying and it really isn't that important. Anglicans try to incorporate church history as well as the historic churches like EO and RC.
"Who do they say I am?" ""Some say John the Baptist; others say Elijah; and still others,...." Matthew 16:13-14 At that time, no one grew up with Christian assumptions infusing the culture and its worldview. Some stuck with Jesus, many could not and walked away. Most Jews could not believe in Jesus even if they wanted to and were impressed by his miracles. Indeed, It was their understanding of scripture that was the greatest obstacle they could not overcome. They just could not reconcile Jesus to their understanding of the scripture they had. And they still don't to this day despite centuries of commentary and analysis by some of the most intelligent people on the planet who knew their HEBREW bible inside and out. From the Christian standpoint, the fact that they "understood" their scriptures so well did not lead them to the truth: it made it IMPOSSIBLE for them to accept the TRUTH and have faith in Christ. In the same manner, perhaps Austin and other seekers cannot accept Catholicism primarily because "it does not jibe" with their understanding and the "clear meaning" (perspicuity) of scripture. But what makes sense may be plausible but totally false. What does not make sense and is implausible may be totally true. But then again, that something doesn't make sense is not actually a hallmark of the truth. :-) That is why the truth and the correct interpretation of scripture had to be revealed because we can't "figure it out." The criterion is not "it make sense to me." The criteria are "to whom was the truth revealed" and who did Christ authorize and deputize to carry on His mission. It was a leap of faith then just as it is now. We were born in uncertainty. We will die in uncertainty. At some point, we make a choice. “Do you want to leave too?” "To whom shall we go?"
Austin if you believe the following, then you know the answer! Jesus est His One True Church, Mt 16 18-19 with Peter as His first representative or Prime Minister Isa 22:22 which is the pillar & foundation of Truth 1 Tim 3:15 which Ignatius named as Katholikos or Universal in 107AD which codified your bible in 382AD which has existed for 2000 yrs, in spite of sinful men & is the longest existing human institution. Fact check if you don’t believe me.
Refinement or decay? I think you need to look at the fruits of the reformation which are, quite clearly, rupture and a gaping wound. This was was neither the fruit of a paternal correction that leads a person to heal their faults (looks to the Saints of that period for how that happens) nor a simple refinement process of moving closer and closer to Truth (because the Catholic Church did that within herself through her councils, doctrines, and encyclicals). No, the fruit of reformation was an ever-growing tear in the Body of Christ. Like a mirror shattered by a rock that keeps splintering into a million tiny shards that barely reflect the light. And if it sounds simplistic, it's because in many ways, it IS that simple, but we tie ourselves into complicated knots, trying to avoid an uncomfortable truth.
I think this points to the kind of value judgments that I talk about in the video. Others would look at the fruit of the reformation and see Bible translation, missionary movements, liturgy in the vernacular, etc. Both stories are true, yet both are incomplete. Which is deemed more important comes down to what we value
@@GospelSimplicitythe same fruits that came from the reformation were produced by the Catholic Church during the same period of time and were far much wider. I don’t know if it’s the North American centrist view of Protestantism that blinds Americans to the fact that the rest of the America’s came to Jesus thru the Catholic Church and that was a much more difficult task, I don’t think Protestants understand the significance of converting large established empires like the Incas, Aztecs, etc over 10 million people, even Canada has had a Catholic majority since. The whole Columbus trip was financed by the Catholic kings of Spain at a time when the Muslims were ruling Spain. Even the good fruits from the reformation pale in comparison to the fruits of the Catholic Church during the same period of time.
These arguments are too complicated Matthew 18:17 says listen to the church and the only church that exists is the one built on Peter in Matthew 16 I don't speak 12 languages I just don't get why people have to make everything complicated
Because Peter didn't begin in Rome and the first Church Peter presided over and passed the keys down to isn't in communion with the second church. The early councils didn't function anything like the modern papal councils either. You don't speak 12 languages. You just need one language to figure it out maybe. The one Peter used in his liturgy and writings. The language his name change used when Christ renamed him. Hint, it's not Latin.
I'm someone who has explored Orthodoxy, Catholicism, Lutheranism, and many other denominations. I've come to the conclusion that we're all trying to make it to Jesus. I still stand by my original thought when I first started my walk with Jesus in a jail cell: the true church of Christ is a spiritual body of believers from all churches no matter what their title is. I think we overemphasize on things that don't really matter. Despite Orthodoxy and Catholicism's claims to being the one true church, I'd argue that if it wasn't for Protestantism, Christianity wouldn't be what it is today. I mean that in a positive and negative way. Positive because many advancements have been made in all walks of life, but negative because of the amount of false gospels out there from these so called preachers on TV. With all that said, thank you Austin for what you do. I still don't know where I'll set as my home church yet, but I plan to make that decision soon.
Protestantism in 1517 was the first satanic attack followed by Masonry in 1717 & Communism in 1917, none of which have succeeded because Jesus said that the gates of hell would not prevail Mt 16:19 Personal interpretation has led to relativism with its many “truths” resulting in contraception, abortion, IVF, divorce, SSM, LGBGT Transgenderism etc. Thanks Protestants!
Judging from your videos, if at all you convert you are likely to go Orthodox. Looks like kneeling before the Pope seems unlikely considering how long you have been searching where to go, just saying. But then you are welcomed to surprise me.
Austin, as a Catholic I have always struggled with the forcing to believe in the Marian dogmas. Let a lone this forcing on the papacy. They always use Mathew 16 but in it's context one can't come to a Supreme pontif. What is a Christian told to do then? Believe in the Gospel and love one another is what pleases God. We must not allow our man-made presuppositions influence our understanding of the biblical text. This includes: systematic theology and others. Icon veneration just isn't part of the message to be saved etc. We are told to serve one another and not get bogged down by icons etc. I know you don't know me: but please understand that I love all people and please do not abandon the Gospel and keep the Law of Faith expressed in love. Nothing else matters.
Schism, for me, is more the refusal to do ministry or have fellowship with other Christian churches. As a result, faith traditions like the LCMS and the RCC and and EO and Mainstream Protestant denominations are the most schismatic. Having physical/institutional/hierarchical unity, if you ask me, works AGAINST genuine unity. Big denominations, rich denominations, powerful denominations have less of a communal feel to them. They feel corporate. They feel oppressive. If they have a valid claim to unity, it’s not a unity that I find (even slightly) appealing. It’s not a type of unity that feels at all biblical.
I took the leap of faith to Catholicism and it was the best decision I’ve ever made.
I as well 🙏🏼📿
Roman Catholicism comes at a huge, huge cost. (All your non-Roman Catholic friends cannot obtain salvation outside the church, and much more)
@@TheOtherCaleb and less. You might want to learn the full meaning of this doctrine.
God bless!
Same here, yes and amen.
I have watched you channel for years I always thought you would convert before me, I took a leap to the Catholic Faith I dont regret it one bit
As many who are under the works are under the curse.
Born and raised Protestant. I was a pastor for nearly 13 years and converted to Catholicism last August. Praise God!
So you have counted the blood of Jesus as a common thing.
Nice token phrase @@gregorylatta8159
Well, Austin this may sound a bit strange. As a soon to be 70 year old watching your interviews and questions prodded me to dig deeper. I am becoming a student of the early Desert Fathers&Mothers. I’m in the midst of taking an online course on Patristics. I was just a Bible nerd for the prior 15 years. Now I can add, a student of the Desert Fathers. Thank you for your role in this new twist in my Spiritual Life.
Live for Jesus!
same dilemma . I'm in my 40s and grew up in a very anti-Catholic Protestant denomination. I've been investigating both the Orthodox Church of America and Roman Catholicism. After a few months, I believe that I'll be joining the Catholic Church.
Praying for you on your journey Home :) God bless!
Good decision!
How do you rational Pope's who don't line up with scripture?
@@bryent7420 Throughout Catholic history there have been many good & saintly popes as well as some bad popes. However, protected by the Holy Spirit, none of the bad popes ever officially taught error. Pope Francis’s erroneous statements are his personal opinion.
@@bryent7420How do you line up the Kings of Judah who didn't line up with God's commandment? Did that invalidate the Davidic line? Did God suddenly demand that the Messiah would not come from the Tribe of Judah anymore? Do you realize that King Manasseh was an ancestor of Jesus?
Hey Austin, I really relate to what you said about taking a leap - after a 10 year journey of deconstruction out of Evangelicalism and then exploration of the apostolic churches, I realised that merely evaluating the data couldn't fully and finally clinch the result. My subjective experience is that God led me into the Catholic Church, but I'm very sympathetic towards those who go to Orthodoxy or stay Protestant, because (in my opinion) at the end of the day your fundamental assumptions will form the interpretive famework you use to evaluate each respective truth claim. I really appreciate your thoughtfulness, and your commitment to church attendance, prayer and leading your wife throughout this often difficult journey is inspiring brother! God bless 🙏
This is so well said. I understand that recognizing some of the subjectivity here makes some people uncomfortable, but, to me, it just seems so much more honest.
12:59 I have the exact same prayer.
It's VERY comforting to know you have this exact tug on your heart as well.
I feel so alone. I have the same devotional and Sunday situation and I have absolutely no idea what to do about it!
God bless you friend 🙏🏼❤ thank you for your channel, I love it!
I had been trying out many churches with my son. He hated going to churches until we happened upon an Orthodox Church. He said he never wanted to go anywhere else. And I admit, I felt a warmth in my heart upon leaving the liturgy. I didn’t know about all the internet drama. 😂
I’m Charismatic and use the Jesus Prayer and also a modified version of the Rosary. Love that you’re exploring other traditions alongside your non-denominational church. 👍 Whatever spiritual disciplines and practices help bring you continually closer to God and make more space for Him in your life. Great channel.
He is in a Non-Denominational Church?
Just finished watching the entire video. Excellent stuff, Austin. I really benefit from the question/answer sessions. Many of the questions raised cover important topics and your answers, although relatively brief, helped stimulate my thoughts about these topics. Thanks again!
Glad you enjoyed it!
Orthodox and can never look back. God bless you on your journey!
Contraception is evil though
@@a.ihistory5879marriage annulment a Jesuit trick too
@@a.ihistory5879And divorce and remarriage (even if it is only up to 3 times)
@@a.ihistory5879 That's not official Orthodox teaching, but what is for Catholics is watering down every single sacrement; sprinkle babies instead of immersing, not giving children comunion, not fasting properly on Wednesdays and Fridays, only taking half of communion not both hosts, priests facing the crowd like Protestants instead of the sancutary in liturgy, novos ordo, weak monastic rules, the list goees on. Wake up and realise that Catholicism isn't what it used to be, it is just a watered down version of its former self. Only Holy Orthodoxy is unchanged.
@@a.ihistory5879not as evil as the papacy.
Hey, cool to see the Gloss in the background! You talked with my brother about that book.
I loved this! Could listen to more of these! Thanks, Austin, I appreciate your thoughtfulness and gentleness so much!
Glad you like them!
Austin, the more I listen to you in this context, the more I wish we had overlapped more at Moody and could have had these conversations in person. I’d be 10x smarter for it. Blessings!
I'm sure that would've been good fun! I'll always cherish my time at Moody where talking about these things with friends over dinner was a daily occurrence.
Every time I watch this channel it reminds me my period in non-Christian Eastern traditions where everybody is a seeker and people are constantly adjusting their practices to their personal preferences. It’s still interesting to hear your perspective. Thanks.
I left evangelical Christianity and became a confessional lutheran earlier this year.
Best decision I've made for me and my family.
Isnt lutheran church called evangelical lutheran church? At least national lutheran churches in europe are.
Same here! I went from Baptist/Non-denominational theology to reformed Baptist, and then to LCMS Lutheran 😊. I was just confirmed this past reformation Sunday. The spark for me leaving Evangelicalism was simply reading about the Lord's Supper in the gospels.
“The bishop is the dispenser of all the sacraments” - St Ignatius of Antioch
Would definitely be interested in hearing more about your deconstruction journey! Granted, I had to dip after about the 45-min mark (so maybe you got more into it later). I can relate to "deconstructing" and then reconstructing my faith, so I'd be interested to hear more about that experience. As always, I appreciate listening to your thoughts!
Been watching the last couple weeks and enjoying it thoroughly as we seem to be taking the same journey together.
A good Q&A. And thanks for answering my question.
Wow, I remember seeing your experiences going to mass video and our few dialogues we had. That was four years ago, wow time flies. Well continued blessing to you and your wife.
I remember your comments! I often refer to people asking me questions that I didn't have good answers to, and yours come to mind!
If you have already looked through history and still unsettled them take a pause and let the Holy sprit take over. At the end of the day, if you feel you are in the right place as a Christian without a doubt in your mind, then just practice according to the practice of your faith with all your being. Trying to overanalyze things will get you nowhere. God bless you on your spiritual journey
In the songs leading up to the Eucharist in the Orthodox Liturgy, the word ‘sacrifice’ is a ‘sacrifice of praise’.
Sacrifices don’t have to be where our mind goes, to blood sacrifices.
In the Liturgy there is a mutual giving of ourselves to God and He gives Himself to us.
It's great that you're now reading/studying thru the great books/classics Aristotle/Plato/etc in your post-grad studies; you would have covered these as the basics in an undergrad at a good Catholic college (Christendom), so you're catching up! ;)
My degrees are kind of flip-flopped in that my first was very specialized (Latin, Greek, 100 credit hours of Bible/Theology), whereas my Master's is now very broad
Thanks for sharing your answers to some great and important questions, Austin. Like you, I see a lot of Christians online look for a more liturgical and traditional denomination. However, I don't personally know anyone who is doing this.
Try His One True Church!
Thank you, Austin! I always appreciate your grace and how you navigate all these topics! I’m an Orthodox convert and have no desire to be otherwise, but I feel like I gain so much from hearing other perspectives (even from the Prot/Evangelical world I used to be in) in such respectful dialogues.
One of the things I have noticed about Catholicism (I'm RC) is that there are lots of devotional practices / spiritualities / and forms of worship (from charismatic to traditional Latin) that is sort of similar to protestanism - ie there is space for a lot of choice about how to pray / worship whilst remaining in a communion that isn't divided in the way protestanism is- we all share same doctrine and obedience to magesterium. A world wide communion with a recognisable leader to the nations, also seems to be particular. A Jewish friend who visited the Vatican said that 'the whole world enters here'. I have to say that I am strongly drawn to Orthodoxy. What I have just described is probably what would keep me Catholic eventhough I also see it as a weakness of our church....
Hello Austin, I think that @Scholastic Answers or Christian B. Wagner have the answers to your questions. Your conversation with Dr. Barnabas Aspray was interesting, and I think a more scholastic perspective would be enlightening. Please consider having Christian on to discuss things. Thank you and God bless you.
second this
Hi, Austin. Is it possible to interview a Japanese American artist (Makoto Fujimura, Reformed Christian), author of Silence and Beauty? Fujimura, an Evangelical, delves deeply into the famous work "Silence" by Shusaku Endo, one of the leading Catholic writers of the 20th century, in this book.
I love your channel. The apostolic succession issue is one I try to understand. If more people study church history, they will see the reformation didn't just happen out of nowhere. Your channel introduced me to Dr. Ortlund. His video about Estifanos of Ethiopia was eye opening. These debates were happening all over Christendom for centuries. We don't know because most of what we hear is about what was going on in major hubs of the Roman Empire. I appreciate your thoroughness.
Being anti-contraception was Protestant orthodoxy until around 1930. All of the Reformers actually found contraceptives morally reprehensible.
I grew up in a Protestant family where my parents (one Lutheran, one Wesleyan) did not use birth control. I am unaware of how common or uncommon that is. Certainly, Evangelicals have often railed against any form of contraception that is in any way abortifacient (which narrows the range of licit methods considerably).
My wife and I, by the way, used NFP in order to GET pregnant!
I would totally watch a video about Camus and Theology-Philosophy crossover. Would love that ❤
Alright. 75,000 subscribers!!!! You can start selling laundry detergent :)
One thing I haven’t heard much about on your podcast is the catholic view on confession.
Good point! I don't think I've done a full length video on that
Why isn't the church united? Because it is the differences that provide entrepreneurs a path to wealth building. Nobody gets rich on obedience.
That's all it's ever been about. Denominations are like football teams, people will always argue about who is better. If everyone sat aside their differences and called out all the evil bs the governments of the world is doing, they'd be powerless.
Yes, pride produces disobedience exacerbated by personal interpretation.
More humility is required!
Thanks for answering my question about the episcopacy. I agree-Ignatius’s words on the Bishop are hard to get around. I’m Reformed with leanings toward Anglicanism, but like you, am married and am comfortably attending a Presby Church. Thanks again-cheers!
The search for the Truth is never comfortable however, very much worth the effort!
His Truth is found only in His One True Church ie Catholicism which has existed for 2000 yrs, the longest lasting institution, proof of her divine origin!
@9:30 if St Ignatius of Antioch says the bishop is in the place of God and that where the bishop is there is the Church, how can bishops be unnecessary for a church to be a church @10:00? God bless!
Oh Annapolis! We used to go to Bay Area CC when we lived in MD
Very nice! It's a beautiful area
I only noticed the live stream as it was going on and joined later.
There was a thing I wanted to ask you:
Have you ever considered making similar content, but talking to atheists and agnostics?
Certainly, there would be scope for discussing some deep questions about how we underpin our beliefs and make our choices.
This from a lapsing agnostic/atheist who's unsure where to go next.
My next episode will be my first with an atheist!
@GospelSimplicity Yes, I just noticed that (a bit too late).
@@GospelSimplicity @Austin do you feel since you started your journey that you've grown as a stronger protestant or that there seems to be some truth over on the Catholic and Orthodox side that just needs to be understood more or vice versa? Your Catholic brother Robert from Puerto Rico 🇵🇷
Watching this a day late- I would definitely watch something on Camus
St Polycarp endorses all of St Ignatius’ letters, and especially his letter to the Philadelphians. And 1 Clement ch 40-45 clearly articulates apostolic succession and the office of the episcopate as well.
Alongside St Dionysius, these early fathers all clearly affirm the 3 fold office of bishopric over priest over deacon.
I‘m in a similar situation. I‘m in Bowie Md and as far as theology goes I’d probably attend a WELS Lutheran church I would attend near me but my wife and I love the Baptist church we are members of and she wouldn’t be happy leaving it
I just can’t get over what I’ve come to view as a self-refuting or implausible doctrine (depending on the version) which is sola scriptura. I think even if Catholicism requires one to adopt some questionable historical claims, which one could argue it does, it at least does not depend on an incoherent claim being true. I believe in the resurrection of Christ with a firm conviction, so my Christianity has to be expressed somewhere. I believe that if Christ is indeed risen he would give us a source of unity and clarity and for this reason I am going to be “swimming the Tiber” this year. And yes I understand it is not the only apostolic tradition, but it gets more complicated regarding those.
How is it incoherent?
@ if scripture, the Protestant 66 book Bible, contains every doctrine that is binding on the Christian (this is how Westminster and most common confessions define it) and Sola Scriptura is a doctrine that is binding on every Christian, then it must be contained within scripture (66 books of the Protestant Bible). But Sola Scriptura is not contained within the Protestant Bible, therefore it is not a doctrine that is binding on all Christians. We see by adopting Sola Scriptura, we refute Sola Scriptura, the doctrine falls under its own weight. We can see that none of the Christians in the first couple of centuries would have understood any of the verses that Protestants point to as teaching Sola Scriptura as actually teaching Sola Scriptura because they did not practice it, therefore the historical-grammatical hermeneutic (interpreting scripture according to how it would have been received by its original audience) which is another necessary aspect of Sola Scriptura, prevents us from interpreting these verses as supporting Sola Scriptura. Other rules of faith are also needed to establish the biblical cannon which are not found in scripture. If these rules are not binding, then one is free to question any book of the Bible and can no longer rely on the Bible in as strong of a sense as Sola Scriptura would require, because it is now merely a fallible list of infallible books.
I have to say, Austin, you seem to speak about the Catholic Church as it is another denomination among many, but it truly is the visible Church Jesus established.
I suppose the second half of that is where we disagree
@ 😢
Love the back ground setting...
Reminds me of Matt Fradds Pints with Aquinas 🍺
Congratulations on your achievement, Austin! So much deserved, my friend! If I can give you any counsel whatsoever, I’d say you shouldn’t expose yourself too much to public curiosity at this point, even knowing you (more or less) became a public figure online. Maybe your wife needs more discrete steps in her (and the couple’s) faith journey! I’m not even suggesting you should not inform the public if you convert or if you don’t, but that you should be more cautious and silent during whatever process you and your family are into, in order to enjoy genuine peace!
More so, I’d recommend you get some “Catholic polemicism” (I know you most certainly consumed more Catholic than Orthodox material at this point, so I’m not talking in general) and not only Catholic diverse theology readings. I’m talking specifically about polemical features like the “papacy” and “the Filioque” under the lenses of both history and theology. I’m saying that because it can be easy to get trapped to the side of polemics of Eastern Orthodoxy (or Protestants, for that matter) if one side is obstinately accusative and the other one has to do all the job to be adequately defensive: first, because they are more numerous in works (try to see “Filioque” and count how many articles and books one can find from Orthodox angle and how many from Catholic angle in English), as the adversarial nature of their stance on those issues can be quite existential and almost identitarian; secondly, because even if one gets a general treatise of Eastern Orthodoxy’s theology or a book only making a general presentation of the Eastern Orthodox faith, in general it will eventually lead to anti-Catholic polemicism in the midst of it because Orthodoxy - more or less - defines itself in opposition just as much as (if not more) it does in direct proposition on these issues. As far as the papacy goes, sometimes I get the impression that you already mentally conceded that it is a sort of implicit “usurpation of power”, while I can naturally see, in all honesty, those denying that very authority as usurpers of God’s plan and design for the Church (and I’m not even exaggerating here: it’s just a matter of finding the correct words for the correct idea I would express). Why don’t you try to find a more neutral - if it’s even possible- “starting” approach while reading papal polemicist sources on the Catholic side, not only those more “ecumenical” but also those who can be strict in the Catholic defense from history and all theological sources, even loudly-spoken? Maybe you could read things related to the papacy (on Vatican I included, or specially) on the more polemical Catholic side without loading too much on the idea of “infallibility” as a prior commitment to the investigation itself.
Just two cents I can drop here ;) Take your time in the journey! Don’t make it an intellectual quest only. God bless your paths always!
Thanks for the recommendations! As always, I appreciate the time and thought you put into your comments.
Great channel brother
This is a great video. You were part of my personal leap into Orthodoxy. Keep struggling, brother. Wherever you land, I'm confident that the Lord is with you.
Hey! I love the channel and was happy to see you mention Anglicanism. Around the 34:00 mark about how we don't see ourselves as the "One True Church". I would be happy to have a long form discussion about this. It is true that we don't see ourselves as the *only* branch of the Catholic Church, but for various reasons I do think it is safe to say that the Anglican view is that while a non-denom church may have a valid lay ministry (valid baptisms and preaching etc.) it is not a "True Church", and is sinfully in schism. Just because we don't claim to have a monopoly on being THE True Church does not mean that in our opinion any old group which claims to be a church without proper preaching AND right administration of the sacraments is a valid church. But still, I understand the point you were trying to make about the difficulty of leaving your current church and emphathise. It can definitely be hard sorting through these issues. Just wanted to clarify the Anglican view if possible. God bless!
The Anglican “Church” is history! Founded by Henry VIII, he murdered two wives & now in the UK, the Anglican “Church” is now the Anglican Community.
In 1930, at the Lambeth Conference, the Anglican Church was the first to break with the ban on contraception & started on the slippery slope!
I'd be happy to chat more about this sometime!
I'd watch a video on Camus and Kierkegaard for sure.
In Orthodoxy, i.e following the teachings of the Apostles and Fathers, there is no leap of faith just realization that it's true and following Christ
I suppose the "realization that it's true" is more immediate for some and feels like a leap for others.
@@GospelSimplicity yeah but I mean because it's true those are obtainable, as opposed to forcing yourself to believe and you actually believing it, thinking it's true because you want to believe in it
Those 2 points come together I guess (this reply and original comment)
@@FirstnameLastname-py3bc Why do you think everyone else would see it clearly?
After we have wrestled to the best of our ability, we need to pray/trust. Sounds simplistic but if our bottom line is to follow Jesus and be his disciple why shd we not pray that he would actually lead us to where he wants us to go?
"The water is purest closest to the source." ... Think Ez. 47:1-12 and Is. 41:17-20, as well as the typology of the Church as the New Israel.
Lutheranism became the answer for us after attending a more Pentecostal church. We found ourselves missing the liturgy, the actual and meaningful celebration of communion, and we grew weary of services that sometimes seemed to center on us or the preacher rather than on Christ.
Studying what Lutheranism actually is and what the tradition says I was happily surprised as well.
Also the hymns full of doctrines are so gangster.
God bless you and the wifey on your journey brother!
Some might wonder - why not EO or RC? I don’t see the exclusivity, the anathemas over every minor detail (icons, calendars, Mary etc), and the occasional disdain for other Christian brothers and sisters found in these traditions reflected in the Bible (nor the early church). God bless!
Take your time, Austin! When and if a change must occur, you will be convicted and you will no longer be able to withstand it; that was my experience, anyhow. It occured after reading a short article on Orthodox Eschatology by Fr. Vassilios Papavassiliou - it was the straw that broke my Protestant back. I could no longer in good conscience continue on without attending the Orthodox Church. My Soul longed for it. Years of continuous, painstaking academic & theological research came to an end. It was time for me.
My decision was not well received by my wife (to put it kindly) four years ago - we'd only been married for about a year - but glory to God, she will be Baptized along with our twin children at our local Antiochian Orthodox Church next month.
Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy upon us.
I hope it's not a rebaptism for your wife. That would be a denial of the creed!
@Joker22593 Joker's an apt name for you. Whether another baptism is needed is in the discretion of local Priest & Bishop based on a number of factors & on a case by case basis, as every situation is different.
@@Joker22593the creed acknowledges one legitimate baptism. If I sprinkle water on my own head and say a few words about christ or the trinity that doesn't entail a baptism, and neither does any protestant dunking. Only a very select few groups get to re enter the church by simple admission of faith. Everyone else at the very least needs their baptism completed through chrism.
During covid I went thru a huge deconstruction phase. You were one of the people that opened the idea of the EO church. After some exploration and contrasts, I saw so much fullness and beauty in the EO; and now a member. Please, please come visit St. Matthew in Columbia, MD. Its so close to you.
My wife and I have actually gotten dinner with Fr. C. He's wonderful.
I agree that evangelism is good but should never supersede one’s own journey and growth in holieness and union with our lord
You might find The Lonely Man of Faith an interesting read. Jewish author with philosophical commentary on Genesis and our purpose. It’s short, basically an essay.
Baptism is great but how many are being rebaptized? That’s an error.
Not only. That’s also a sacrilege.
There is only one Baptism. Re-baptism is not a thing, it is impossible. It is not a re-baptism when it happens, it is a conditional baptism, just in case the first was invalid. Certainly when Orthodox do this it is to make absolutely sure the Chrismation and Communion are valid. Surely it is better to err on the side of caution. Each decision is unique and down to the local Bishop.
It is a pledge of a good conscience towards God. If this didn’t happen the first time, then the person was only made wet.
@ That’s a gravely incorrect take. If you say that the sacrament of Baptism does not imprint character (the “seal” or “σφραγίς”, as more usual in the Greek patrology), it would be contrary to the text of Mark 16, 16, if understood in its entirety. As said, _”Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned”:_ a baptized person can lose belief but a baptized person can never lose the seal of the baptized, if it was valid (regardless of if it was licit).
Not only that. I think it is problematic to take that road because it will enter all over again the problem of rebaptism of heretics and the Donatist crisis: if baptism does not imprint character or the “seal” but only a diffuse episode of grace, whomever feels to arbitrate where grace is (like Donatists and crypto-Donatists of modern day) - meaning heretics can’t offer that nor any kind of seal -, then the position of always rebaptizing heretics that confer baptism as the Church does (correct form and matter, and in the name of the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit) would have prevailed. But it hasn’t. The Donatists were declared heretics and not the other way around. Pope St Stephen of Rome won over the discussion with St Cyprian of Carthage.
The Fathers of Nicea have dealt with that SPECIFICALLY in two of its canons. And they simply attest that the dogmatic position of the Church of Rome prevailed in its canonical regulations.
In *Canon 8* of Nicea, the Ecumenical Council decided that the Novatian heretics (they called themselves the “purists” or the ‘cathari’) - curiously enough, Novatianism was declared a heresy by the Church of Rome using the letters of St Cyprian of Carthage (!) - MUST NOT BE rebaptized when coming to the Church.
In *Canon 19,* on the other hand, the Holy
Ecumenical Council decided that Paulianist heretics (the followers of Paul of Samosata, also known as “Adopcionists”) MUST BE rebaptized when coming to the Church.
What was the difference between one case (Novatianism) and the other (Adoptionism)? Although both groups were dogmatically declared heretics by the Popes and Ecumenical Councils, Adoptionists had to be rebaptized because they rejected the Most Holy Trinity. In this case rebaptism is unavoidably necessary.
For a Catholic not only it is heresy to rebaptize “heretics” without further distinctions but it is also sacrilegious and disrespects the canons and the acts of the Ecumenical Council of Nicea. The oneness of baptism is not something to play with: since it is the only sign of sacramental unity amidst disunity, it will eventually lead to the oneness of faith again. Devil or “diablo” comes from the Greek word “dia-ballein”, which means the union of the word “dia”, that means the other side, across (like in ‘diagonal’) and “ballein”, that means to shoot, to aggressively push (like in ‘ballistic’). So the devil is the one to push to the other side what was united before; he is the one behind the multitude of baptisms as theatrical acts or of the Neo-Donatist heresy of these days, honestly. That’s a serious issue, a very serious one.
@@masterchief8179 The act of baptism in and of itself does not alter a person's relationship with God in any way. If we examine each and every example of baptism in the bible, we see this with Simon in Acts 8. Baptism in all it entails, which includes a message of faith, and includes the mercy and grace of God, then one is saved. There is not one single example in the bible, that backs up your view of baptism. Are you aware of this?
Time to switch to orthodoxy, the best path for repentance and examining the heart!
That's your opinion.
@brothergerasimos-bd3pq gerasimo, you from kefalonia ? Greece ? Come back to the truth re gerassime
@@TruePathLiving Everyone claims to have the truth these days. Read my comment that I wrote on here.
Hey Austin! Can you discuss about the Eucharist. Do you believe that the Eucharist is Christ Himself!
John 6;53
"Very truly I tell you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have, no life in you.
Will the paper on Camu and Kierkegaard you’re working on be available anywhere when you’re finished with it? I’d be interested in checking it out.
That's good to know! I've toyed with putting my papers on Patreon or creating a substack. I'll think more about that
@ also up for more existentially focused content! Could you say more about the program you’re doing through St. John’s, is it a BA or MA?
@ it’s an MA. It’s a great books program which covers Literature, Philosophy and Theology, History, Politics and Society, and Mathematics and Natural Science. You can then choose a focus from there, which I’ve done and chosen Philosophy and Theology. You can find the core curriculum reading lists on their website!
@@GospelSimplicity Sweet! I didn't see much Camu and Kierkegaard listed in the program reading list are these ones part of your focus on Philosophy and Theology? Also thanks for your replies, this is my last question, I promise!
@ that’s correct. I’m currently taking a preceptorial (think, elective) on Camus
A shibboleth is a litmus test, not simply a nonsense word.
This was amazing and the perfect length to clean my house to. Your wife should leave and you should hit 75,000 followers more often
Lol, I'll be sure to let her know!
1:09:15 supporting a political party should have a lot to do with where you think the party is going or what drives and feeds it. In my opinion, leftism is rooted in Christianity and a rejection of its supernatural concepts. The whole thing falls apart over time and becomes a form of nihilism as things play out. A trend I see among leftists no matter where they exist on the spectrum is they see the Democrat Party as mostly aligned with their individual values with anything outside of that merely being an exception. None understand they will be (or already are) outcasts if they believe the same thing for decades because there is this thrust towards nihilism. At its worst, their relationship with ideas becomes a series of changing instructions to follow to maintain social acceptance, perceived superiority, and power.
I asked this before, but I wasn't sure if I got a good answer from those without a magistereum. If there's a place for this discussion where I won't be bothersome, point me to it!
1) If the magistereum of the Church gets something fatally wrong, we are morally obliged to separate from it.
2) Separating from the magistereum of the Church is an example of schism.
3) Schism is always a sin.
4) If the magistereum of the Church gets something wrong, we are morally obliged to sin.
5) We are never morally obliged to sin.
C) It is not possible for the magistereum of the Church to get something fatally wrong.
What would you say in response?
I don't think we are morally obliged to separate from the church, but simply deny the teaching in place of some higher teaching which may or may not be infallible.
@@whitevortex8323 I see. But, some teachings in the Catholic church are attached to an excommunication - to hold to them is to be excommunicated.
Is it schismatic (for a member of an ecclesial church) to hold to these teachings, knowing that they constitute separation from the church?
2 or 3) is/are wrong, separation from a church that is fatally wrong is not schism.
The assumption you've built into this is that the Church = the church, which given that the church is everyone in the body of Christ, which is all who have been baptised into Christ, is wrong. It's a circular argument.
@@SeanusAurelius Maybe I can elucidate my point with a hypothetical.
Say every church was fatally wrong. Would you make a new denomination?
I’m Catholic but I find it very lonely. I only started two years ago after cultural Catholic childhood and secular agnosticism. It’s very disheartening to see it as true but also see my parish as a desert. Meanwhile the nondenominational church is in a strip mask next to a wig store and has dinner fellowship and small groups and long teaching through the Bible. I’m so jealous and conflicted
I feel your pain. May God comfort you and strengthen you.
Find a Catholic group that you can join for spiritual support & fellowship.
I’ve been involved with the Marian Movement of Priests for 30 yrs which has helped develop my faith, go on great pilgrimages & make marvelous friends.
I’m not sure where you are but my Orthodox Church is thriving. I came from a Lutheran background and never expected to see such a full church. So many young people and families that we can’t fit the pews. Obviously this is probably not the norm everywhere in the country but maybe it’s something to look into?
Be the change you want to see. Start the dinner fellowship yourself. You can do it!
I’m an evangelical and started attending daily mass at the cathedral here in Little Rock and mother parish near my home on Sundays. I don’t relate at all. Grass seems always greener on the other side. Go and experience the non-denominational church after mass. I attend both on Sundays and enjoy making a contrast. I’m in RCIA and will be baptized on Easter vigil as I was baptized at the age of 9 in with a Jesus-only baptism.
It is not a matter of Thomas not being smart, or that he is just smarter than you. The fact that he may not resonate with you is that he asks questions that you don't ask, and the tools he uses to craft an answer may not be the tools that anyone alive today might naturally deploy.
Fair points!
Catholicism or Orthodoxy end of story.
Orthodox here. God willing, may the Schism heal one day.
The western church and the eastern church are the two lungs of the body of Christ, and they must breathe together!
Let us pray the schism ends!
The Orthodox Church is Catholic. The Pope is neither Catholic nor Orthodox.
Have you watched the video “Catholicism: IRREFUTABLE Proof” (Clickbait title) from Scholastic Answers on TH-cam? The video gives a really good argument from the fittingness of the Catholic theological system in my opinion
Ironically I commented this just before the question on Christian Wagner
I have not! I generally avoid videos with titles like that, but maybe I'll check it out
@@GospelSimplicity Haha understandable. I only mention because you said you’re making a video about “arguments for churches that don’t exist” and that video actually has a section about that point from a Thomistic perspective, which might be interesting to you.
Very enjoyable! Good job my friend!
So much of what you shared I also feel that ‘Christianity as a life we live and not just an idea in our head.
Like Saint Basil says… Christ tells us clearly what we are to do, how to follow Him…but who wants listen these days?Be Baptized. Receive the Eucharist “Do this”. Take up your cross. Care for the poor, widows, fatherless and the stranger among you.
Scripture says that many left Him because it was too hard, too much to ask.
I think many come to that crossroads and don’t know what to do.
I’m glad your program is here. a
I encourage people to visit churches they’ve never been to and break the prejudices. People are still being disowned by families because of the Church they want to attend.
☦️
The truth is a person: Jesus the Messiah, Lord of All.
Concepts, practices, sacraments, denominational structures exist to point us to him. Regardless of the sign on the door.
It is for each person to deny self, and walk in the simple faith as did Abraham, trusting in the Lord for all things, and pointing others to his power and grace.
At some point you do have to make a decision. Sitting on the fence is intolerable. "Be hot or cold, but the lukewarm I will spew from my mouth."
What decision do you want him to make? Sounds like he has already chosen to follow Christ and rely on Him for salvation.
Dude! He is making vids about all kinds of fenomena in christendom. It does not indicate that in his private life of practicing christian he is sitting on the fence indefinitely.
He has the right to take as long as he feels he needs. He’s already Christian anyways so I’m not sure why you felt it necessary to comment this
Way to twist scripture. God is speaking of surrendering to Him or the world, not one denomination over another.
@@JWM5791 Christ established a Church - none without Apostolic succession is HIS church, and as such you should decide to truly follow him. Only the Catholic and Orthodox Church has the true Body and Blood of Christ and consumes it like Christ demanded. Only the Catholic and Orthodox church has real confession etc.
Which of the Catholic Marian dogmas is the least convincing to you?
For me it’s the immaculate conception of Mary.
I respectfully say that having the government take care of things such as the poor and everything else you said can be very weird. As the government taking money from you it’s not you giving it in the same sense as to charity. And the people receiving that aid do not see it as charity or something that they’re receiving at someone’s sacrifice. So really takes a lot of the good out of what charity is and should be.
I know you said you aren’t Anglican, but it sounds like you’re basically a High Church Re-formed (not reformed as in Calvinism but literally re-formed) Anglican. Although, Anglicanism is a big umbrella so it’s not a totally fair assessment lol.
I suspect I'd be very happy in an Anglican church
Jc ryle
@@GospelSimplicity Doesn't it bother you that the Anglican Church was founded by King Henry the VIII?
@@MikeM-cz5ln no because he didn't actually reform the english church, Cramner and other theologians after him did.
@@MikeM-cz5ln What matters is the person's relationship with Jesus, not the history of the church. I've done a lot of studying and it really isn't that important. Anglicans try to incorporate church history as well as the historic churches like EO and RC.
"Who do they say I am?"
""Some say John the Baptist; others say Elijah; and still others,...." Matthew 16:13-14
At that time, no one grew up with Christian assumptions infusing the culture and its worldview.
Some stuck with Jesus, many could not and walked away.
Most Jews could not believe in Jesus even if they wanted to and were impressed by his miracles.
Indeed, It was their understanding of scripture that was the greatest obstacle they could not overcome.
They just could not reconcile Jesus to their understanding of the scripture they had.
And they still don't to this day despite centuries of commentary and analysis by some of the most intelligent people on the planet who knew their HEBREW bible inside and out.
From the Christian standpoint, the fact that they "understood" their scriptures so well did not lead them to the truth: it made it IMPOSSIBLE for them to accept the TRUTH and have faith in Christ.
In the same manner, perhaps Austin and other seekers cannot accept Catholicism primarily because "it does not jibe" with their understanding and the "clear meaning" (perspicuity) of scripture.
But what makes sense may be plausible but totally false.
What does not make sense and is implausible may be totally true.
But then again, that something doesn't make sense is not actually a hallmark of the truth. :-)
That is why the truth and the correct interpretation of scripture had to be revealed because we can't "figure it out."
The criterion is not "it make sense to me."
The criteria are "to whom was the truth revealed" and who did Christ authorize and deputize to carry on His mission.
It was a leap of faith then just as it is now.
We were born in uncertainty. We will die in uncertainty.
At some point, we make a choice.
“Do you want to leave too?”
"To whom shall we go?"
There is only one truth, everything else is just a personal opinion or point of view.
Austin if you believe the following, then you know the answer!
Jesus est His One True Church, Mt 16 18-19 with Peter as His first representative or Prime Minister Isa 22:22 which is the pillar & foundation of Truth 1 Tim 3:15 which Ignatius named as Katholikos or Universal in 107AD which codified your bible in 382AD which has existed for 2000 yrs, in spite of sinful men & is the longest existing human institution. Fact check if you don’t believe me.
So, you have zero problems with Neo-Palamism?
Refinement or decay? I think you need to look at the fruits of the reformation which are, quite clearly, rupture and a gaping wound. This was was neither the fruit of a paternal correction that leads a person to heal their faults (looks to the Saints of that period for how that happens) nor a simple refinement process of moving closer and closer to Truth (because the Catholic Church did that within herself through her councils, doctrines, and encyclicals). No, the fruit of reformation was an ever-growing tear in the Body of Christ. Like a mirror shattered by a rock that keeps splintering into a million tiny shards that barely reflect the light. And if it sounds simplistic, it's because in many ways, it IS that simple, but we tie ourselves into complicated knots, trying to avoid an uncomfortable truth.
I think this points to the kind of value judgments that I talk about in the video. Others would look at the fruit of the reformation and see Bible translation, missionary movements, liturgy in the vernacular, etc. Both stories are true, yet both are incomplete. Which is deemed more important comes down to what we value
@@GospelSimplicitythe same fruits that came from the reformation were produced by the Catholic Church during the same period of time and were far much wider. I don’t know if it’s the North American centrist view of Protestantism that blinds Americans to the fact that the rest of the America’s came to Jesus thru the Catholic Church and that was a much more difficult task, I don’t think Protestants understand the significance of converting large established empires like the Incas, Aztecs, etc over 10 million people, even Canada has had a Catholic majority since. The whole Columbus trip was financed by the Catholic kings of Spain at a time when the Muslims were ruling Spain. Even the good fruits from the reformation pale in comparison to the fruits of the Catholic Church during the same period of time.
By the way congratulations on the 75,000 subscribers.
Idk where Jesus said people can get divorced at all. He literally said anyone who does is committing adultery
Anyone who divorces *and remarries* commits sin.
La respuesta es tan obvia... Das muchas vueltas y no das el paso. Ánimo!!!
These arguments are too complicated
Matthew 18:17 says listen to the church and the only church that exists is the one built on Peter in Matthew 16
I don't speak 12 languages I just don't get why people have to make everything complicated
Because Peter didn't begin in Rome and the first Church Peter presided over and passed the keys down to isn't in communion with the second church. The early councils didn't function anything like the modern papal councils either. You don't speak 12 languages. You just need one language to figure it out maybe. The one Peter used in his liturgy and writings. The language his name change used when Christ renamed him. Hint, it's not Latin.
@BarbaPamino ok loser name the church
The city on the hill. The light to the world. The pillar of Truth. What's their website?
Here's your one chance
I'm someone who has explored Orthodoxy, Catholicism, Lutheranism, and many other denominations. I've come to the conclusion that we're all trying to make it to Jesus. I still stand by my original thought when I first started my walk with Jesus in a jail cell: the true church of Christ is a spiritual body of believers from all churches no matter what their title is. I think we overemphasize on things that don't really matter. Despite Orthodoxy and Catholicism's claims to being the one true church, I'd argue that if it wasn't for Protestantism, Christianity wouldn't be what it is today. I mean that in a positive and negative way. Positive because many advancements have been made in all walks of life, but negative because of the amount of false gospels out there from these so called preachers on TV.
With all that said, thank you Austin for what you do. I still don't know where I'll set as my home church yet, but I plan to make that decision soon.
Thanks for sharing your perspective on this!
Protestantism in 1517 was the first satanic attack followed by Masonry in 1717 & Communism in 1917, none of which have succeeded because Jesus said that the gates of hell would not prevail Mt 16:19
Personal interpretation has led to relativism with its many “truths” resulting in contraception, abortion, IVF, divorce, SSM, LGBGT Transgenderism etc.
Thanks Protestants!
O Simplicime! You have narrowed down the choices to Catholicism and Austinism. What will it be?
Judging from your videos, if at all you convert you are likely to go Orthodox. Looks like kneeling before the Pope seems unlikely considering how long you have been searching where to go, just saying. But then you are welcomed to surprise me.
I will not be united with false doctrine.
Austin, as a Catholic I have always struggled with the forcing to believe in the Marian dogmas. Let a lone this forcing on the papacy.
They always use Mathew 16 but in it's context one can't come to a Supreme pontif.
What is a Christian told to do then? Believe in the Gospel and love one another is what pleases God. We must not allow our man-made presuppositions influence our understanding of the biblical text. This includes: systematic theology and others.
Icon veneration just isn't part of the message to be saved etc. We are told to serve one another and not get bogged down by icons etc.
I know you don't know me: but please understand that I love all people and please do not abandon the Gospel and keep the Law of Faith expressed in love. Nothing else matters.
Anglicanism/episcopal makes sense when they are pro gay marriage?? 😅
Man made Anglicanism is on its way out!
This guy is just stirring the pot, again
What unites Us is greater than what divides Us...
Schism, for me, is more the refusal to do ministry or have fellowship with other Christian churches. As a result, faith traditions like the LCMS and the RCC and and EO and Mainstream Protestant denominations are the most schismatic.
Having physical/institutional/hierarchical unity, if you ask me, works AGAINST genuine unity. Big denominations, rich denominations, powerful denominations have less of a communal feel to them. They feel corporate. They feel oppressive. If they have a valid claim to unity, it’s not a unity that I find (even slightly) appealing. It’s not a type of unity that feels at all biblical.
I became Anabaptist after discovering the big errors of Protestantism, Catholicism and Orthodoxy...
You'll probably like one of my upcoming interviews then!
What specific Catholic errors may I ask?
@@geoffjs teaching that salvation does not exist outside the unity of the church and faith which is very explicit in the Papal writings.
@@ChurchontheStreets-w7g which is true given Mt 16:19 & Mt 18:18
@@geoffjs if Catholicism is true, then every good fruit I've seen from other Christians is an illusion. I don't have that much faith...
Reformed Baptist is the closest denomination to the authors intent of the scriptures.