@redeemedzoomer6053 Grüß Dich! I just watched this great video. I constantly thought about Godʼs role and plan for his covenant in this. Can you extract any theology from this? I even think the latter example with the milk mixing in with tea to create a temporal creative complexity before fading into entropy might be even used in a moral argument but idk ua-cam.com/video/DxL2HoqLbyA/v-deo.htmlsi=Kj0RCohx2AmkDLeO
On a related note, can you explain some questionable books that aren't in the bible? In particularly books referenced in Jude, where he talks about angels being imprisoned, archangel michael and satan fighting over moses' body, and prophesies of enoch. One explanation I saw was that jude was just giving examples from popular literature like a pastor would in his sermons, but you don't put random pastor sermons in the Bible, everything in it comes from divine inspiration.
can we all pray for the person replying to every single comment saying that "Jesus isn't the messiah"? let me also take this opportunity to say that we shouldn't be getting into a fight with him (or her) or trying to engage, but let us pray that the truth may be revealed to him (or her) by the glory of God.
I’m a Muslim and we do believe that Jesus (peace be upon him) is the true Messiah, he didn’t die yet cuz we believe in the ascension and we also believe in the second coming of Jesus and we are the true followers of him to kill the Antichrist. Muslims believe in one god just like Jesus said in the bible “Your God is one” Ibrahim,Moses, Jesus and Mohammed (peace be upon them all) were prophets sent by God to guide us but they are NOT Gods.
@@NearestGalaxy thank you for the peace, I’ve heard that from a muslim perspective that Jesus was never crucified but was taken? Not too sure just curious what you know. I will forever believe in my faith however one thing I noticed is you mentioned that Jesus is seen as a God, another christian may have a better perspective but Jesus was the human embodiment of God and the holy spirit is the spirit of God, forming the holy trinity (same entity different embodiment). I am aware that in the muslim faith its acknowledged that both Jesus and Mohammed are prophets, but in Christianity Jesus was not a prophet but the son of God, not flesh birthing flesh sort of way yet specifically the human embodiment of God. Naturally we will have different views and opinions but thank you for your view! My best friend is a muslim but doesn't practice much but we never let our differences get in the way!
@@matheuscaneta1194 They aren’t the same thing according to RZ, JWs technically still believe in God but most Unitarians just consider God a useful idea to inspire people to do social justice and such-they’re also very different in their theology, rules, etc.
@@Kenny-mu2xb I def think that with the community Zoomer has revealed and gathered within the Church, more and more Christians are becoming more accpeting of each other!!
In Mark 9: 38-41 Jesus explicitly condones other fellowships and says that as long as you are received well because you belong to Christ, that Church is of the True Church and its followers will not lose their reward. Whoever is not against us is for us.
Great video, just to clarify some things on the Oriental Orthodox We say One Nature, from two Natures - Christ is fully human and fully divine, and say this using the same Christology that St. Cyril of Alexandria did And for the See of Alexandria, the Bishop even prior to the schism was always called “Pope” it’s just a part of the Alexandrian tradition that we have kept until this day
As a Catholic I find the Oriental Orthodox churches (mostly the Ethiopian and Coptic ones) very interested to learn about. Greetings, my brother in Christ
Christ/Jesus never formed a church, he just taught others how to be good. Edit: For those citing the Bible, it only says he would “built” a church, never states he did.
Great video! I just have one note. The baptist were congregationalists who were influenced by the moderate anabaptist and split off, becoming baptists, and they founded rode island.
On the Baptists, you got us mostly right, but there were two major parts of us. The General Baptists had communion with the Anabaptists after splitting from the Church of England around 1600, and believed in free will, the Particular Baptists that came later, and they were much more Calvinistic. Most Particular Baptists are now called "Reformed Baptists", as they hold to Calvin's view of predestination, and formed around London in 1640.
Yeah, this is important to note. A lot of people think there was one group called "baptists" that then split between "general baptists" and "particular baptists." The more accurate explanation is that two movements popped up roughly around the same time that both called themselves "baptist" however the two groups differed on soteriology and didn't interact much with each other. They were effectively different denominations.
Calvinist still believe in free will, in that you voluntarily choose to sin. Although, if by “free will” you mean that we are random(because that is the only way to not be determined) then I guess you can say we don’t believe in free will.
Actually its a misnomer that that most Baptist today are Reformed Baptists, it’s just that a lot of the Confessional Baptist denominations (the Baptists that strictly adhere to a set historical Confession of Faith) such as the London Baptist Confession (which is based off of the Westminster Confession of Faith from the Presbyterian tradition) are Reformed Baptist - also more Reformed Baptist mega church preachers get more press. But, overall most Baptist denominations and congregations are indifferent when it comes to soteriology. Most major Baptist denominations line the Southern Baptist Convention - SBC (largest Protestant denomination in the USA) and Converge - Baptist General Conference accept all 4 major soteriological views of Arminianism, Provisionism (a.k.a. “traditionalist soteriology” in the SBC), Lutheran (in rare cases - minor prevalence in Converge), and Reformed. Most SBC congregations are either Arminian, Provisionist, or some odd mix of the 4 positions mentioned, and a sizable minority being Reformed.
As an Egyptian Christian from the Coptic Church, I would like to say that we never deny the nature of the Other God. We believe that when God took on flesh, His divinity was united with humanity. God is fully God and fully human, and human nature and divine nature are united. + Saint John Chrysostom said: “God is not separated from His humanity.” The theology of a single moment or the blink of an eye. The same words were said by Saint George and Saint Basil. We believe in the nature of divinity and the nature of humanity. These two natures are united and not united + I do not know that we, the Orthodox Church, separated even though there was no difference in doctrine and the divinity of Christ, and I believe that there was a misunderstanding in the last council, nothing more and nothing less.✝️☦️☦️✝️i hope we get united again Orthodox church and Catholic church and all christians amen
I believe the Coptic Patriarch was not at the council of Chalcedon, and did not decide to agree with it later on, so they basically booted out the Coptic church. Something similar happened with the Assyrians.
This is very useful as someo who plans on changing churches when i move it. Gotta lovr when Redeemed Zoomer says "zooming time" and just zooms all over the place!
I think it would help me and probably allot of people out if you actually set Dates every time a new denomination was formed because it gets a little confusing sometimes on how much time has passed
I always think its good to try and learn new things about others denominations. We often have biases in our heads that are untrue, or get high and mighty thinking we know everything. ❤
I love your videos! Would you ever be able to create a video detailing all of the fulfilled prophesies thus far in human history, and the number of remaining prophesies left to be fulfilled until the end times? I would find that so interesting, especially considering how crazy the world is/has been getting. Thank you so much!
6:42 not to mention Isaac Watts was Congregationalist, and got a lot of hate for writing hymns we still sing today, like "Joy to the World" and "When I Survey the Wondrous Cross".
Very good video! I’m a Catholic myself, and from my point of view most of the information is pretty accurate. Thank you for being intellectually honest.
Great video! The only issue is the Pentecostal movment started in 1901 at the Topeka Kansas revival not the Azuza Street Revival in 1906. Azuza Street came from the Topeka Revival.
I'm convinced that the Eastern and the Oriental Orthox Church should not have split. The Christology diferences are just different wordings of the same theological belief.
@@areyoutheregoditsmedaveMay I hear why though? All I've heard from Eastern Orthodoxs are "They are different from us on Christology, of which is very important, so they are heretics"
It can actually be argued that the schisms began not during the time of the schism (excommunication, disagreements) but before, when cultures developed on their own and as such, developed their own linguistic and cultural traditions that can be misinterpreted by others. Same goes with the filioque clause, yk.
Question from a muslim here, don't wanna debate, don't wanna be rude or anything i swear but like how, after studying the church history or even seeing this video people can still be protestant ? I mean if i would be a christian i would be an orthodox, maybe a catholic, i would choose people who stay on the tradition of the early church and not not some denomination invented 100 years ago ? Again i just want an answer and i don't try to be rude (sorry for my english)
that's what i thought too. i'm also a muslim but if i would be christian i'd definitely choose either catholic or orthodox cause they're basically the only churches who stay on the tradition of the early church which is the church that jesus built (according to the christian belief ofc)
@@sxxfal because the belief is held that the early church or biblical christianity isnt reflected. Thats why, however alot of our protestant churches aren't either. Churches on an individual level are where people need to look
I am a Christian and I really appreciate this comment. It's a complex issue but a big reason people are negative towards Catholicism/Orthodoxy is because of Sola Scriptura, which is very widespread. In addition, there is HUGE misinformation about what the Early Church was. Many people really do believe that 1st century Christianity resembled an American Non Denominational service held in Pastor Bobs living room. I am a former Protestant, I'm so glad God lead me away from those groups. I also have alot if respect for Muslims, they respect the Virgin Mary and Jesus, although of course we disagree on many fundamental things. Compared to what is written in the Talmud....
HOLY CRAP! You finally gave a shout out to us Mennonites! THANK YOU!! Also, I think you can also say that Baptists are Puritans from England who adopted some of the Anabaptist views while fleeing religious persecution in the Netherlands
So that you can identify the denomination by the logo. Like how the cross with a circle is Presbyterian, the cross with a heart is Lutheran, the cross with a four-petaled flower is Episcopalian, etc.
Some of them are not official, RZ uses them to distinguish them from each other-the symbols make sense too, the cross with the footrest is a common symbol of the Eastern Orthodox Church, while the one with the heart is most commonly associated with Lutherans
I don’t know the meaning behind most of them, but the Eastern Orthodox cross ☦️ has the two extra bits in reference to other aspects of the cross. For example, I believe the small line at the top is in reference to the plaque Pilot put on the cross that named Christ as the king of the Jews
Will you ever debate someone from the church of the east? I’ve seen you in debates against a lot of Christian denominations but non against the Assyrian church. I think it would be interesting to see.
@@esserman1603 Fair enough but i didn't specifically ask if he would do it on his channel . I want to know if he is willing to do it in general on any channel.
This was interesting, id love to hear more on the orthodox churchs and their history as well, for instance, old faith russian orthodox vs the standard russian orthodox we think of today.
Hi, Hello sir I'm from India and I found your videos very helpful and I am thinking if such knowledgeable videos would be available in my language specially in hindi it would be very beneficial for us.
Noooo ! What is the Orthodox Church (Eastern Church) and what do Orthodox Christians believe? The Orthodox Church (Eastern Church) is not a single church, but a family of 13 independently administered branches, dominated by the nation of their domicile (e.g. Greek Orthodox Church, Russian Orthodox Church). They are united by their understanding of sacraments, doctrines, worship and church administration, but each administers its own affairs. The head of each Orthodox Church is called "Patriarch" or "Metropolitan" (Archbishop). The Patriarch of Constantinople (Istanbul, Turkey) is considered ecumenical - or interdenominational. He is comparable to the Pope in the Roman Catholic Church. Unlike the Pope, who is called VICARIUS FILIUS DEI (the Vicar of the Son of God), the Bishop of Constantinople is known as PRIMUS INTER PARES (the first among equals). He enjoys special honour, but has no power over the other 12 Orthodox parishes. The Orthodox Church claims to be the one true church of Christ and seeks to trace its lineage back to the apostles through an unbroken chain of apostolic succession. Orthodox thinkers debate the spiritual status of Roman Catholics and Protestants, some of whom consider them heretics (heretics). Like Catholics and Protestants, the Orthodox also favour the Trinity, the Bible as the Word of God, Jesus as the Son of God and many other biblical teachings. However, they have much more in common with Catholics in terms of doctrine than with Protestant Christians. Unfortunately, the doctrine of justification before God by faith alone is no longer present in the Orthodox Church. The Orthodox Church, on the other hand, emphasises theosis (literally: "deification"), the gradual process by which Christians become more and more like Christ. However, what many in the Orthodox tradition fail to understand is that "deification" is the ongoing result of salvation, not a prerequisite for salvation itself. Other Orthodox characteristics that conflict with the Bible include: The equal authority of church tradition and Scripture Discouragement that individuals outside the tradition interpret the Bible The perpetual virginity of Mary Prayer for the dead Infant baptism, without reference to the responsibility and faith of the baptised. The possibility of receiving salvation after death The possibility of losing salvation While the Orthodox Church has produced some great voices and many within the Orthodox tradition have a genuine saving relationship with Jesus Christ, the Orthodox Church does not speak in a clear way to correspond with the good news of Christ and the Bible. The Reformation's call for "Scripture alone, faith alone, grace alone, and Christ alone" is missing in the Orthodox Church and in the Roman Catholic Church, and this is too valuable a treasure to be left out. You see that the Orthodox and Catholic have the same problems... God has built a living church, not one of stone and certainly not an institution. The church is the assembly of all believers. John 3:36: "36 He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him." I wish you much joy in studying the Word of God
Is Peter the Rock? In that Matthew 16:18 on this rock, the rock Jesus was talking about was the Revelation that Peter had received that Jesus was the Christ. That Revelation is the rock. Jesus called Peter Petros which is a pebble and the Revelation he called Petra which is a rock like a mountain. The entire passage is talking about Jesus. Not Peter. Also Jesus said “I WILL give” that is future tense so it was not in that very moment. Also just a couple verses later Jesus calls Peter Satan in v23. So if Jesus gave Peter the keys in that moment then Satan immediately had them. And seeing how Jesus said I WILL GIVE which is future tense, then he did NOT give Peter the keys in that moment. The only other time Jesus talks about the keys to the kingdom of heaven he is talking to ALL of the Apostles in Matthew 18. So all of the Apostles received the same “keys” to the kingdom. Peter is not lifted up higher than the other Apostles. So at no point did Jesus give the keys ONLY to Peter. I would say that Apostle Paul is actually the Apostle who had the most keys as he received and gave the most revelation and the most scripture. So we see the Keys are given by God as revelation to born again believers for Binding and Loosing things in the kingdom in Heaven and on earth. The keys are not handed down in papal succession especially since the Pope dies before picking a successor. So how then are the keys handed down? Keys for binding and loosing are given by God via Revelation to individual believers. God shows no partiality or favoritism towards anyone (he is no respector of persons). He gives keys to those who seek after his heart by Faith. The first key being that Jesus is the Christ. This gets you into heaven as you are born again. The keys to the kingdom of heaven are for setting people free from bondage from the devil not to reign over men and women from afar in a castle/mansion.
Yeah no, Catholics resemble nothing of the early church teachings. Orthodox Christians are the unchanged one TRUE church of Jesus Christ and the apostles. Allll the other so called versions of Christianity are mere man-made dilutions and do not come from God. The Orthodox revival is strong as people now realise what's been apparently lost has always existed, just suppressed in the Holy Orthodox Church of Christ
The Council of Trent and the 4th Lateran Council are shining beacons of how great Catholicism is at remaining consistent throughout the centuries. Picking and choosing what you want from your own ecumenical councils and regularly having to point out that the "infallible" popes have a long history of evils and sometimes outright heresy. Let's also not ignore the anti-popes with various levels of legitimacy.
Look at your Catholic head the Pope: he supports gay marriage (forbidden in Romans 1), idolatry (forbidden in Exodus 32), Mary simping (forbidden in Exodus 20:2-5), and so many more stuff that I can write ten paragraphs worth of Roman Catholic heresy. Please dude, just read the Bible and stop listening to your priest for once.
Just another denomination. The real predenominational church was the early Catholic (Universal) Church which was neither Roman Catholic and neither EO.
@@pedroguimaraes6094 this is dumb, this basically claims that the early church does not exist, which means that the church died, and I've noticed only protestants say this since they are the newest denominations from the 16th century onward
@@pedroguimaraes6094and who is the successor to the early church ? It can only be Roman Catholic or Eastern Orthodox because the Nestorians and Oriental Orthodox both left the Universal Great Church and protestants broke from Roman Catholicism.
@@pedroguimaraes6094 I can give you many sources of saints from different countries in the world, from the second century, declaring that Peter and Paul went to Rome only to build their church there, and make it the heart of all churches around the world. You can believe that all the apostles can claim to be the early church, but you can’t possible claim that the apostle Andrew is the only rightful one to claim to be the early church, and Peter and Paul came letter.
1:07 Slight mistake. Constantinople became "new Rome" after Rome fell, it wasn't just a feeling that everyone gravitated to the East, it was made official.
Constantine moved the capital of the Roman Empire from Rome to Constantinople in 330 AD, so in a sense it became the the official core of the Roman Empire before its fall.
What is so interesting about it? I mean, lutheranism is basically a "root church" (for the lack of better word) for a pretty big chunk of modern-day churches, therefore it is inherently pretty influential, isn't it?
All protestants use the old testament that Luther decided by himself, he was the council of 1 man to decide the books of the Bible, protestants better praise this man, cause they trust in his judgment above the judgment of multiple bishops from different generations who reunited multiple times over the centuries to discuss the books of the bible, and they all thought different of Luther.
@@matheuscaneta1194 You couldn't be further from the truth. You've been consuming too much pop Roman Catholic apologetics without doing enough research yourself. Luther did not decide the OT canon by himself. Luther, who is so often accused of personally removing these books, included ALL of them in his translation of Die Bibel as well as the Prayer of Manasseh. That would bring Luther’s total to 74 books. Perhaps Lutherans should accuse Roman Catholics of removing one? Rome's canon was very much not closed until Trent. This is evidenced by the fact that numerous Roman Catholic clergy did not view the apocrypha as divinely inspired, but good and beneficial to read. Even Cardinal Cajetan, the man who opposed Luther at his hearings and helped draw up the bill of Luther's excommunication, held this view. Here are his own words: “Here we close our commentaries on the historical books of the Old Testament. For the rest (that is, Judith, Tobit, and the books of Maccabees) are counted by St Jerome out of the canonical books, and are placed amongst the Apocrypha, along with Wisdom and Ecclesiasticus, as is plain from the Prologus Galeatus. Nor be thou disturbed, like a raw scholar, if thou shouldest find anywhere, either in the sacred councils or the sacred doctors, these books reckoned as canonical. For the words as well of councils as of doctors are to be reduced to the correction of Jerome. Now, according to his judgment, in the epistle to the bishops Chromatius and Heliodorus, these books (and any other like books in the canon of the Bible) are not canonical, that is, not in the nature of a rule for confirming matters of faith. Yet, they may be called canonical, that is, in the nature of a rule for the edification of the faithful, as being received and authorised in the canon of the Bible for that purpose. By the help of this distinction thou mayest see thy way clearly through that which Augustine says, and what is written in the provincial council of Carthage.” In fact, at the Council of Trent, the vote to settle on the 73-book cannon that the Roman church uses today was 24 for, 15 against, and 16 abstained. More people abstained or voted against that canon than actually voted in favor of it. That alone should tell you that the canonicity of the apocrypha was not settled even up through the counter-reformation. Historically, the church didn't necessarily view the Bible as a set table of contents, but as a rule and guide for the Faith. Lutherans and many orthodox groups actually don't have a closed cannon that specifies the books of the Old and New Testaments. If quelling the Reformation was not the main underlying motive for calling the council of Trent, Rome's cannon most likely would have remained open, too.
@@matheuscaneta1194 Protestants use the OT canon by Melito of Sardis (oldest christian OT canon), with the addition of Esther (even though Esther contains nothing about God & not cited in the NT, it has a typology that many early Christians liked). We see that the councils have contradicted each other over the years and their conflicts have been infected by secular politics. Your councils are not infallible - but they *can* be inerrant.
I liked the video, but like your previous "family tree" video, I thought you could have dated when each split occurred. I know for some splits it's not as simple as pinning it to an exact date, but even a rough year range would be helpful to understand the timeline.
Having been raised Church of Christ honestly I think it sounds worse on paper than it actually is. Go to few a CoCs and a few Baptist churches and you’ll be hard pressed to find the difference. Plus despite the initial anti-creedal origins Church of Christ is still Trinitarian with baptisms that even Catholic Church recognizes as legitimate
Right? Worth mentioning that the CoC broke off from Presbyterianism. Very hard to see a difference between the Baptist/nondenominational route of breaking off from a Protestant denomination, mostly rejecting creedalism, embracing a more independent, low church structure, rejecting Lutheran views of communion, and becoming credo-baptist with that of the CoC. I think RZ may just be salty that the CoC was made from a group of Reformed Christians who reformed too hard.
Yes, the Catholic church believes once baptized, always baptized. It's a work of God and the Holy Spirit. If a person is baptized in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit. Just a little friendly agreement❤
I just hope he includes baptists with the english separatists ... Also, the reformed baptists trace their history to the puritans in the Church of England
He puts them splitting off the catholic branch is because he wants to put baptist closer to the nestorian church since according to him they have nestorian tendencies.
Puritans are the real Reformed congregationalists, Baptists split between those who followed a more diluted version of anabaptist's believes (General Baptist) and those who diluted It even more by mixing anabaptist believes with reformed believes (Particular Baptist who started calling themselves "Reformed Baptist in the 1960's). But the Church who really have the same Reformed Theology than Presbyterians and Continental Reformed but with a congregational government is the puritan Congregationalist Church.
@@geochonker9052 none of the seven ecumenical councils happened in Rome. The prominent Greek Fathers were from Antioch, Jerusalem, Constantinople, etc.
@@geochonker9052 Rome is extremely important of course, but Christianity did not begin there and the most significant events in early Christianity occurred in the East.
@@redeemedzoomer6053You technically made a "why you're not a Messianic Jew" video than explaining it itself as a sect of the body of Christ - I know you have bias due to being a Presbyterian but I think it's fascinating because they see themselves as splitting off from Rabbinic Judaism and just continuing post-Second Temple Judaism, with the aspect of Jesus as the Messiah and treating the New Testament as canonical (and most disregarding the Talmud as valid interpretation).
@@zjzr08 Jews have great pride in being a jew, a « i’m not like the others » type of thing. So if messianic juddaism is a way for them to accept Jesus but keeping their special honor title of jew, I’m all for it, for power to them. But in Israel, messianic juddaism isn’t considered juddaism, and even reformed atheists jews can claim nationality but messianic jews can’t.
@@matheuscaneta1194 I know all of that, just saying Messianic Jews don't accept that notion, and disagree that Rabbinic courts should be the standard to determine the age old question of "what is Jew", more arguing it's more about the culture, language and history (and to their perspective, never went away from worshipping the God of Israel).
Respectfully, your discussion or RC vs Ortho here displays a poor understanding of Roman History in the centuries concerned here (from Constantine to after Theodosius towards the fall of the West). Specifically - shortly after Xtianity was legalised and long before it was the state religion, Constantinople was already a more important capitol than the city of Rome from a political-economic stance.
Noooo ! What is the Orthodox Church (Eastern Church) and what do Orthodox Christians believe? The Orthodox Church (Eastern Church) is not a single church, but a family of 13 independently administered branches, dominated by the nation of their domicile (e.g. Greek Orthodox Church, Russian Orthodox Church). They are united by their understanding of sacraments, doctrines, worship and church administration, but each administers its own affairs. The head of each Orthodox Church is called "Patriarch" or "Metropolitan" (Archbishop). The Patriarch of Constantinople (Istanbul, Turkey) is considered ecumenical - or interdenominational. He is comparable to the Pope in the Roman Catholic Church. Unlike the Pope, who is called VICARIUS FILIUS DEI (the Vicar of the Son of God), the Bishop of Constantinople is known as PRIMUS INTER PARES (the first among equals). He enjoys special honour, but has no power over the other 12 Orthodox parishes. The Orthodox Church claims to be the one true church of Christ and seeks to trace its lineage back to the apostles through an unbroken chain of apostolic succession. Orthodox thinkers debate the spiritual status of Roman Catholics and Protestants, some of whom consider them heretics (heretics). Like Catholics and Protestants, the Orthodox also favour the Trinity, the Bible as the Word of God, Jesus as the Son of God and many other biblical teachings. However, they have much more in common with Catholics in terms of doctrine than with Protestant Christians. Unfortunately, the doctrine of justification before God by faith alone is no longer present in the Orthodox Church. The Orthodox Church, on the other hand, emphasises theosis (literally: "deification"), the gradual process by which Christians become more and more like Christ. However, what many in the Orthodox tradition fail to understand is that "deification" is the ongoing result of salvation, not a prerequisite for salvation itself. Other Orthodox characteristics that conflict with the Bible include: The equal authority of church tradition and Scripture Discouragement that individuals outside the tradition interpret the Bible The perpetual virginity of Mary Prayer for the dead Infant baptism, without reference to the responsibility and faith of the baptised. The possibility of receiving salvation after death The possibility of losing salvation While the Orthodox Church has produced some great voices and many within the Orthodox tradition have a genuine saving relationship with Jesus Christ, the Orthodox Church does not speak in a clear way to correspond with the good news of Christ and the Bible. The Reformation's call for "Scripture alone, faith alone, grace alone, and Christ alone" is missing in the Orthodox Church and in the Roman Catholic Church, and this is too valuable a treasure to be left out. You see that the Orthodox and Catholic have the same problems... God has built a living church, not one of stone and certainly not an institution. The church is the assembly of all believers. John 3:36: "36 He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him." I wish you much joy in studying the Word of God
@@FollowerOfTheLight2782 Catholic is the OG. The Orthodox Church was made afterwards from Constantinople, the great schism and excommunication from the Catholic Church
For God, who said, "Let light shine out of darkness," has shone in our hearts to give the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ. (2 Corinthians 4:6, ESV) This is the origin of the church.
The Churches of Christ formed from a bunch of Presbyterians in the restoration. Could you not say they are connected to the early church due to this? They confess what is in the creeds but do not do the creeds themselves. In other words, the creeds are upheld just not recited.
I disagree with the videos take on the Restorationist/Stone-Campbell movement because, even if they say they don’t follow creeds, a good chunk of them unintentionally do and are found within traditional Christian orthodoxy, where their beliefs are not too far apart from other Protestant (Mainline, Evangelical, and Fundamentalist) traditions - they’re a decent mix of several denominational traditions then evolved into their own tradition - but then again due to the lack of creeds (or maybe even statements of faith) a lot of bad theology can easily enter without being officially subscribed to by the whole tradition at large. Although some subdivisions within the Restorationist movement like the Church of Christ (I believe) have weird theology around not using instruments in church, certain fundamentalist Presbyterians also share similar weird theology surrounding music in church even to the extent of singing Psalms only like Psalms-only Presbyterians.
My brother in Christ, please keep learning and talking. The more you do, the more people will become Catholic and the faster Protestantism will die off. God bless RZ for being the best Catholic apologist!
The first church started in Jerusalem, at Pentecost 33 AD with James the Just chosen as the first pope or leader. That church still exists today, as the Greek Orthodox Patriarch of Jerusalem. St Peter founded the church in Antioch (East Orthodox) 34 AD before starting the church in Rome (Roman Catholic). There were 5 original church Patriarchs. Jerusalem, Antioch, Alexandria, Constantinople, and Rome. During the Great Schism, everyone sided together except Rome, being the lone dissident.
If you want to go back that far then neither Jerusalem, Alexandria nor Antioch are Greek because their real successors are Copts and Syriacs. The Greek bishops of those Sees were imposed by Constantinople.
Good explanation of the Baptists. I believe Baptists come from the Anglicans through John Smyth (1570). Just because they had similar beliefs as the Anabaptists doesn't mean they are from the same group.
It's complicated further by Smyth's decision to become an Anabaptist *after* forming the Baptist church. Thomas Helwys decided not to join the Mennonites, so Baptists never formally merged with Anabaptists to become a single tradition.
Redeem Zoomer you should make a tier list of every denomination based off their name alone. So Presbyterians would rank very high on theology... but low on a name teir list. Why is your whole denomination named after old people?
3:35 why did you split the continental reformed? Huguenots, German reformed and Hungarian reformed are already the same church, also known as the Swiss/Continental reformed church.
@Kenny-mu2xb well think of it like thise Jesus is the Christ The son of God And God in flesh God loved us so much he willingly put himself on earth and lived his life in servitude And died the most painful brutal death in history of betrayal and had the sins all of them put on him And God wills that not one person be lost He loved us to that degree And if thats true And he knew the beginning to the end dont you think he would have cleared up the intellectual issues we have today? Considering most of the gospels share the same message and information id imagine if it was as important as salvation from hell the apostles would have written them down as spoken by our Lord
Thats why i really dont like exclusivist christians (mostly catholic and orthodox). Despite our differences, in the end we praise the same God and have the same principles on essentials. Awful exclusivists 😒.
@@D4rkmatter Let’s be honest with ourselves, we believe in an exclusive Gospel if we believe Scripture. Narrow is the way, few find it, the path to destruction is wide, etc. Knowing the right Gospel message is essential, that’s why Paul says a different Gospel, even if it’s from an angel, should be ignored.
6:14 this is the most downstate sentence ive heard in a minute lmao great video also, excellent job summarizing the church denomination history in 10ish minutes!
I think that's a bit unfair to the Restorationists. I'm non-denominational(specifically, I go to a church in the Independent Christian Church Movement) but they don't think Christianity needs to be rebuilt. There were absolutely some from around the same time who did(7th Day Adventists, the Mormons, etc.) but their thing is more that they feel that creeds distract from the Bible itself. It's more of a "we need to get back to basics and focus on what the Word actually says, rather than dividing over stuff not there" than needing to rebuild it. Ironically, they then split over something not in the Bible, whether it's okay to use instruments in worship.
I disagree with the videos take on the Restorationist/Stone-Campbell movement because, even if they say they don’t follow creeds, a good chunk of them unintentionally do and are found within traditional Christian orthodoxy, where their beliefs are not too far apart from other Protestant (Mainline, Evangelical, and Fundamentalist) traditions - they’re a decent mix of several denominational traditions then evolved into their own tradition - but then again due to the lack of creeds (or maybe even statements of faith) a lot of bad theology can easily enter without being officially subscribed to by the whole tradition at large. Although some subdivisions within the Restorationist movement like the Church of Christ (I believe) have weird theology around not using instruments in church, certain fundamentalist Presbyterians also share similar weird theology surrounding music in church even to the extent of singing Psalms only like Psalms-only Presbyterians.
I think the problem is that RZ is Reformed, and the CoC was founded by reformers who reformed too hard and accidentally ended up restoring instead of reforming. When you break off from RZ’s denomination, you don’t get to be Protestant anymore, lol
You really are going to act shocked that a 2000 year old Institution has gone through structural changes as it expanded from hundreds to literal billions of followers? Come on dude.
@@Davidguy57 Shocked? Who's shocked? Fragmenting and alteration is exactly what you would expect from human institutions lacking any genuine, divine guidance. I think what we see makes perfect sense in context.
@@Fassnight They don't agree as much as they really should and need to. The mentalities and requirements on salvation, redemption, sin, etc, can all vastly differ, to the point where the little they do agree on is little more than a formality for them to barely even identify with each other. Again, if any of them were taking this seriously, there shouldn't be any additional sects or denominations.
If this video gets 1 million views I'll make a video covering every HERETICAL "Christian" sect/cult. So like and share!
6:03 you misspelled independent
@redeemedzoomer6053 Grüß Dich! I just watched this great video. I constantly thought about Godʼs role and plan for his covenant in this. Can you extract any theology from this? I even think the latter example with the milk mixing in with tea to create a temporal creative complexity before fading into entropy might be even used in a moral argument but idk ua-cam.com/video/DxL2HoqLbyA/v-deo.htmlsi=Kj0RCohx2AmkDLeO
You got rebutted by The Catacumen UA-cam channel on your video of Solo Scriptura (it's a part 1 and 2 video) God bless and may you have a blessed day!
On a related note, can you explain some questionable books that aren't in the bible? In particularly books referenced in Jude, where he talks about angels being imprisoned, archangel michael and satan fighting over moses' body, and prophesies of enoch. One explanation I saw was that jude was just giving examples from popular literature like a pastor would in his sermons, but you don't put random pastor sermons in the Bible, everything in it comes from divine inspiration.
@@Aisjdn@redeemedzoomer6053 this man is spamming your comment section
Love it when John the Methodist said "It's methoding time" and then proceeded to method all over the place. Truly a moment of all time.
The beauty of this meme 😂
Or the part when John Knox said "It's Presbytering time!" and presbytered all over the place. Truly one of the electronic storages of all time.
@@Fireklatchit's Lutherin' time! (Proceeds to Luther all over the place).
can we all pray for the person replying to every single comment saying that "Jesus isn't the messiah"? let me also take this opportunity to say that we shouldn't be getting into a fight with him (or her) or trying to engage, but let us pray that the truth may be revealed to him (or her) by the glory of God.
Well said.
Well said❤
Amen
I’m a Muslim and we do believe that Jesus (peace be upon him) is the true Messiah, he didn’t die yet cuz we believe in the ascension and we also believe in the second coming of Jesus and we are the true followers of him to kill the Antichrist.
Muslims believe in one god just like Jesus said in the bible “Your God is one”
Ibrahim,Moses, Jesus and Mohammed (peace be upon them all) were prophets sent by God to guide us but they are NOT Gods.
@@NearestGalaxy thank you for the peace, I’ve heard that from a muslim perspective that Jesus was never crucified but was taken? Not too sure just curious what you know. I will forever believe in my faith however one thing I noticed is you mentioned that Jesus is seen as a God, another christian may have a better perspective but Jesus was the human embodiment of God and the holy spirit is the spirit of God, forming the holy trinity (same entity different embodiment). I am aware that in the muslim faith its acknowledged that both Jesus and Mohammed are prophets, but in Christianity Jesus was not a prophet but the son of God, not flesh birthing flesh sort of way yet specifically the human embodiment of God. Naturally we will have different views and opinions but thank you for your view! My best friend is a muslim but doesn't practice much but we never let our differences get in the way!
"A bunch of calvinists got too calvinist for other calvinists."
A recurring problem. 😂
Where?
@@Aisjdnyou got us!
@@Aisjdntroll
Well God willed it so....
It was predestined to happen.
I met an ex Jehovah Witness who converted to Unitarian. He still went door to door, but had nothing to say.
🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣 Sounds like a Steven Wright line.
I didn’t think one could downgrade from a JW but here we are
Isn’t jeohvah witness unitarianism ?
@@matheuscaneta1194 They aren’t the same thing according to RZ, JWs technically still believe in God but most Unitarians just consider God a useful idea to inspire people to do social justice and such-they’re also very different in their theology, rules, etc.
*Universal Unitarian
We gotta pray for unity.
Amen. At worst, let us be unity in our charity towards Christians with different beliefs, but ideally we should work to agree and resolve differences
yes
Despite the differences between these churches, we are one in that we worship the One who sets us free.
@@Kenny-mu2xb I def think that with the community Zoomer has revealed and gathered within the Church, more and more Christians are becoming more accpeting of each other!!
In Mark 9: 38-41 Jesus explicitly condones other fellowships and says that as long as you are received well because you belong to Christ, that Church is of the True Church and its followers will not lose their reward.
Whoever is not against us is for us.
Sorry but are we gonna talk about the way RZ says “Coffee”
@@Aisjdn Right, and you’re not a bot scrolling down and replying that that to every conceivable comment-oh wait
He’s a NY Jew. He has to say Kwafee
@@Marc.1776. True. Btw want some coauwfee brother
I was just about to say.
I WAS ABOUT TO COMMENT ABOUT THAT LMAO
Can you make a video about your view on Noah's flood? I would really like to hear your opinion as a Christian who believes in evolution
Yes!
Yeah I like this idea
@@spiffygonzales5160 you share my opinion
@@spiffygonzales5160flat earth isn't a theory
I think you don't know what a theory is
@@Aisjdn which one did he not do
I loved this. Sums up what I was learning recently. This was great
Great video, just to clarify some things on the Oriental Orthodox
We say One Nature, from two Natures - Christ is fully human and fully divine, and say this using the same Christology that St. Cyril of Alexandria did
And for the See of Alexandria, the Bishop even prior to the schism was always called “Pope” it’s just a part of the Alexandrian tradition that we have kept until this day
@@Aisjdn bruh have you even read the Bible?
@@NikhilisHerehe’s a troll. Spamming everywhere
As a fellow Copt, a better way to describe it is one nature from two essences. Your video submission was excellent by the way!
Hello
As a Catholic I find the Oriental Orthodox churches (mostly the Ethiopian and Coptic ones) very interested to learn about. Greetings, my brother in Christ
If it wasn’t founded by Christ at Pentecost, it isn’t the one true Church
amen
All of the churches in the image came from this same Church.
Christ/Jesus never formed a church, he just taught others how to be good.
Edit: For those citing the Bible, it only says he would “built” a church, never states he did.
Anyone who follows the teaching of Jesus and his good news is a member of the church
When did jesus create a church?
Great video! I just have one note. The baptist were congregationalists who were influenced by the moderate anabaptist and split off, becoming baptists, and they founded rode island.
On the Baptists, you got us mostly right, but there were two major parts of us. The General Baptists had communion with the Anabaptists after splitting from the Church of England around 1600, and believed in free will, the Particular Baptists that came later, and they were much more Calvinistic. Most Particular Baptists are now called "Reformed Baptists", as they hold to Calvin's view of predestination, and formed around London in 1640.
Yeah, this is important to note. A lot of people think there was one group called "baptists" that then split between "general baptists" and "particular baptists." The more accurate explanation is that two movements popped up roughly around the same time that both called themselves "baptist" however the two groups differed on soteriology and didn't interact much with each other. They were effectively different denominations.
Calvinist still believe in free will, in that you voluntarily choose to sin. Although, if by “free will” you mean that we are random(because that is the only way to not be determined) then I guess you can say we don’t believe in free will.
YEah I always get a bit confused in his videos,my baptist church split off from a Methodist church.
It sounds like Anabaptists are like Christian anarchists, anti-tradition and anti-authority (except for God)
Actually its a misnomer that that most Baptist today are Reformed Baptists, it’s just that a lot of the Confessional Baptist denominations (the Baptists that strictly adhere to a set historical Confession of Faith) such as the London Baptist Confession (which is based off of the Westminster Confession of Faith from the Presbyterian tradition) are Reformed Baptist - also more Reformed Baptist mega church preachers get more press.
But, overall most Baptist denominations and congregations are indifferent when it comes to soteriology. Most major Baptist denominations line the Southern Baptist Convention - SBC (largest Protestant denomination in the USA) and Converge - Baptist General Conference accept all 4 major soteriological views of Arminianism, Provisionism (a.k.a. “traditionalist soteriology” in the SBC), Lutheran (in rare cases - minor prevalence in Converge), and Reformed. Most SBC congregations are either Arminian, Provisionist, or some odd mix of the 4 positions mentioned, and a sizable minority being Reformed.
Love these videos which help me understand denominations 🤩
I was thinking about making this video! Awesome work.
Thanks for sharing 🙏🏾
His grace and mercy be upon you and your loved ones 🕊️🥛🍯
As an Egyptian Christian from the Coptic Church, I would like to say that we never deny the nature of the Other God. We believe that when God took on flesh, His divinity was united with humanity. God is fully God and fully human, and human nature and divine nature are united. + Saint John Chrysostom said: “God is not separated from His humanity.” The theology of a single moment or the blink of an eye. The same words were said by Saint George and Saint Basil. We believe in the nature of divinity and the nature of humanity. These two natures are united and not united + I do not know that we, the Orthodox Church, separated even though there was no difference in doctrine and the divinity of Christ, and I believe that there was a misunderstanding in the last council, nothing more and nothing less.✝️☦️☦️✝️i hope we get united again Orthodox church and Catholic church and all christians amen
I believe the Coptic Patriarch was not at the council of Chalcedon, and did not decide to agree with it later on, so they basically booted out the Coptic church. Something similar happened with the Assyrians.
You actually make this stuff INTERESTING!!! And also, a nice touch at the end on unity. Plus, you remind me of a tv show called Adam Ruins Everything!
This is a great video,I really like learning about church history.
It was nice of you to include the picture of Bishop Mari Emmanuel. Man really is a G.
Assyrian and Coptic, fascinating. Can't wait to watch.
@@Aisjdn He literally defeated death for us. And if you still don't believe...at least he wasn't a pedo.
The Assyrians are literally heretics though
@@jasonoconner7863 Referring to a Mohamed moment ? 😂
I am so excited.
This is very useful as someo who plans on changing churches when i move it. Gotta lovr when Redeemed Zoomer says "zooming time" and just zooms all over the place!
this video is actually even better than expected :))
God bless you RZ !
No it is not..read my comments.
See ya later
I think it would help me and probably allot of people out if you actually set Dates every time a new denomination was formed because it gets a little confusing sometimes on how much time has passed
Visit Mr Trent horn again! Would love to hear another episode with you two!
Im pretty sure trent would help him with the orthobros that like to harass his comment sections and invade his servers.
There’s other good Catholic UA-camrs like reason and theology and voice of reason
@@user-xh6mx8kq5l just found voice of reason today
@@user-xh6mx8kq5l my favorite is Joe Heschmeyer over at Shameless Popery
I always think its good to try and learn new things about others denominations. We often have biases in our heads that are untrue, or get high and mighty thinking we know everything. ❤
I love your videos! Would you ever be able to create a video detailing all of the fulfilled prophesies thus far in human history, and the number of remaining prophesies left to be fulfilled until the end times? I would find that so interesting, especially considering how crazy the world is/has been getting. Thank you so much!
You should do a video of Clergy orders and laypeople there abilities and tiers
@@Aisjdntry to justify your blasphemy
Can you maybe make a Video about scorseses silence? I love your Videos btw
@Aisjdn Enough spam.
Great video. Thanks for the unbiased information!
video very well done, very educational .I really learned something.
0:01 start of a banger.
@@Aisjdnyou don’t know the prophecies then
Which ones did he not fulfill? @@Aisjdn
6:42 not to mention Isaac Watts was Congregationalist, and got a lot of hate for writing hymns we still sing today, like "Joy to the World" and "When I Survey the Wondrous Cross".
Very good video! I’m a Catholic myself, and from my point of view most of the information is pretty accurate. Thank you for being intellectually honest.
Great video! The only issue is the Pentecostal movment started in 1901 at the Topeka Kansas revival not the Azuza Street Revival in 1906. Azuza Street came from the Topeka Revival.
Adding water to espresso doesn't make regular coffee, it makes an americano.
Which honestly is even better for a description of the Baptist Church. Considering it’s predominantly dominant in the United States.
well, ackshually....🤓☝
Sorry, someone had to do it
Well, that's a pretty smooth analogy, if I do say so myself.
I'm convinced that the Eastern and the Oriental Orthox Church should not have split. The Christology diferences are just different wordings of the same theological belief.
You'd be shocked how common this is.
it may appear so to your modern, uninvested, rationalist mind. but it a huge Christological difference and matters deeply.
@@areyoutheregoditsmedaveMay I hear why though? All I've heard from Eastern Orthodoxs are "They are different from us on Christology, of which is very important, so they are heretics"
We've had joint agreements and our bishops agree that we profess the same thing but just worded it differently
It can actually be argued that the schisms began not during the time of the schism (excommunication, disagreements) but before, when cultures developed on their own and as such, developed their own linguistic and cultural traditions that can be misinterpreted by others. Same goes with the filioque clause, yk.
Great video! Greetings from an Orthodox from Serbia!☦️
Wow, a very fair and reasonable video that is charitable towards all.
Except the CoC, which doesn’t get to be Protestant anymore 😂 guess that’s what happens when you break off from RZ’s denomination lol
@@Tennishangman is that Churches Of Christ ? Where would they fit?
Good presentation.
Question from a muslim here, don't wanna debate, don't wanna be rude or anything i swear but like how, after studying the church history or even seeing this video people can still be protestant ? I mean if i would be a christian i would be an orthodox, maybe a catholic, i would choose people who stay on the tradition of the early church and not not some denomination invented 100 years ago ? Again i just want an answer and i don't try to be rude (sorry for my english)
that's what i thought too. i'm also a muslim but if i would be christian i'd definitely choose either catholic or orthodox cause they're basically the only churches who stay on the tradition of the early church which is the church that jesus built (according to the christian belief ofc)
@@gilaradi6337 yess exactly
@@sxxfal because the belief is held that the early church or biblical christianity isnt reflected. Thats why, however alot of our protestant churches aren't either. Churches on an individual level are where people need to look
I am a Christian and I really appreciate this comment. It's a complex issue but a big reason people are negative towards Catholicism/Orthodoxy is because of Sola Scriptura, which is very widespread. In addition, there is HUGE misinformation about what the Early Church was. Many people really do believe that 1st century Christianity resembled an American Non Denominational service held in Pastor Bobs living room. I am a former Protestant, I'm so glad God lead me away from those groups. I also have alot if respect for Muslims, they respect the Virgin Mary and Jesus, although of course we disagree on many fundamental things. Compared to what is written in the Talmud....
@@CherryDreamer96 yeah i see, thanks for your answer !
“Regular Baptist caw-uhfee”
HOLY CRAP! You finally gave a shout out to us Mennonites! THANK YOU!!
Also, I think you can also say that Baptists are Puritans from England who adopted some of the Anabaptist views while fleeing religious persecution in the Netherlands
Can you please make a video explaining why each denomination has a different cross
So that you can identify the denomination by the logo. Like how the cross with a circle is Presbyterian, the cross with a heart is Lutheran, the cross with a four-petaled flower is Episcopalian, etc.
these are not the official denominations logos
Some of them are not official, RZ uses them to distinguish them from each other-the symbols make sense too, the cross with the footrest is a common symbol of the Eastern Orthodox Church, while the one with the heart is most commonly associated with Lutherans
@@johannthedeceitful5968 oh i see, thank you
I don’t know the meaning behind most of them, but the Eastern Orthodox cross ☦️ has the two extra bits in reference to other aspects of the cross. For example, I believe the small line at the top is in reference to the plaque Pilot put on the cross that named Christ as the king of the Jews
Will you ever debate someone from the church of the east? I’ve seen you in debates against a lot of Christian denominations but non against the Assyrian church. I think it would be interesting to see.
I’ve only done debates against baptists and Lutherans
@@redeemedzoomer6053 I've seen you in many other debates with for example eastern orthodox and even one time with oriental orthodox to.
@@MNN1991 I think he means on his channel. The ones against Eastern Orthodoxy were one Kyle's channel.
@@esserman1603 Fair enough but i didn't specifically ask if he would do it on his channel . I want to know if he is willing to do it in general on any channel.
@@Aisjdn He fulfilled so many prophecies. Which prophecy did He not fulfil?
I'm Baptist God bless You all
This was interesting, id love to hear more on the orthodox churchs and their history as well, for instance, old faith russian orthodox vs the standard russian orthodox we think of today.
NEW RZ VIDEO RAHHHHH
Maybe it's not about which denomination , but the denominations we made along the way ❤😂🎉
Very helpful - thank you brother
Hi, Hello sir I'm from India and I found your videos very helpful and I am thinking if such knowledgeable videos would be available in my language specially in hindi it would be very beneficial for us.
Orthodoxy is not a branch. It is the trunk. It is not a denomination. It is pre-denominational. Glory to Jesus Christ!☦️
Amen
Noooo !
What is the Orthodox Church (Eastern Church) and what do Orthodox Christians believe?
The Orthodox Church (Eastern Church) is not a single church, but a family of 13 independently administered branches, dominated by the nation of their domicile (e.g. Greek Orthodox Church, Russian Orthodox Church). They are united by their understanding of sacraments, doctrines, worship and church administration, but each administers its own affairs.
The head of each Orthodox Church is called "Patriarch" or "Metropolitan" (Archbishop). The Patriarch of Constantinople (Istanbul, Turkey) is considered ecumenical - or interdenominational. He is comparable to the Pope in the Roman Catholic Church. Unlike the Pope, who is called VICARIUS FILIUS DEI (the Vicar of the Son of God), the Bishop of Constantinople is known as PRIMUS INTER PARES (the first among equals). He enjoys special honour, but has no power over the other 12 Orthodox parishes.
The Orthodox Church claims to be the one true church of Christ and seeks to trace its lineage back to the apostles through an unbroken chain of apostolic succession. Orthodox thinkers debate the spiritual status of Roman Catholics and Protestants, some of whom consider them heretics (heretics). Like Catholics and Protestants, the Orthodox also favour the Trinity, the Bible as the Word of God, Jesus as the Son of God and many other biblical teachings. However, they have much more in common with Catholics in terms of doctrine than with Protestant Christians.
Unfortunately, the doctrine of justification before God by faith alone is no longer present in the Orthodox Church. The Orthodox Church, on the other hand, emphasises theosis (literally: "deification"), the gradual process by which Christians become more and more like Christ. However, what many in the Orthodox tradition fail to understand is that "deification" is the ongoing result of salvation, not a prerequisite for salvation itself. Other Orthodox characteristics that conflict with the Bible include:
The equal authority of church tradition and Scripture
Discouragement that individuals outside the tradition interpret the Bible
The perpetual virginity of Mary
Prayer for the dead
Infant baptism, without reference to the responsibility and faith of the baptised.
The possibility of receiving salvation after death
The possibility of losing salvation
While the Orthodox Church has produced some great voices and many within the Orthodox tradition have a genuine saving relationship with Jesus Christ, the Orthodox Church does not speak in a clear way to correspond with the good news of Christ and the Bible. The Reformation's call for "Scripture alone, faith alone, grace alone, and Christ alone" is missing in the Orthodox Church and in the Roman Catholic Church, and this is too valuable a treasure to be left out.
You see that the Orthodox and Catholic have the same problems...
God has built a living church, not one of stone and certainly not an institution. The church is the assembly of all believers.
John 3:36: "36 He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him."
I wish you much joy in studying the Word of God
Catholic: it came from Jesus and the apostles. You know, the ones who actually matter when it comes to Christianity.
Is Peter the Rock?
In that Matthew 16:18 on this rock, the rock Jesus was talking about was the Revelation that Peter had received that Jesus was the Christ. That Revelation is the rock. Jesus called Peter Petros which is a pebble and the Revelation he called Petra which is a rock like a mountain. The entire passage is talking about Jesus. Not Peter.
Also Jesus said “I WILL give” that is future tense so it was not in that very moment.
Also just a couple verses later Jesus calls Peter Satan in v23. So if Jesus gave Peter the keys in that moment then Satan immediately had them. And seeing how Jesus said I WILL GIVE which is future tense, then he did NOT give Peter the keys in that moment.
The only other time Jesus talks about the keys to the kingdom of heaven he is talking to ALL of the Apostles in Matthew 18. So all of the Apostles received the same “keys” to the kingdom. Peter is not lifted up higher than the other Apostles. So at no point did Jesus give the keys ONLY to Peter.
I would say that Apostle Paul is actually the Apostle who had the most keys as he received and gave the most revelation and the most scripture.
So we see the Keys are given by God as revelation to born again believers for Binding and Loosing things in the kingdom in Heaven and on earth.
The keys are not handed down in papal succession especially since the Pope dies before picking a successor. So how then are the keys handed down?
Keys for binding and loosing are given by God via Revelation to individual believers. God shows no partiality or favoritism towards anyone (he is no respector of persons). He gives keys to those who seek after his heart by Faith. The first key being that Jesus is the Christ. This gets you into heaven as you are born again.
The keys to the kingdom of heaven are for setting people free from bondage from the devil not to reign over men and women from afar in a castle/mansion.
Yeah no, Catholics resemble nothing of the early church teachings.
Orthodox Christians are the unchanged one TRUE church of Jesus Christ and the apostles. Allll the other so called versions of Christianity are mere man-made dilutions and do not come from God.
The Orthodox revival is strong as people now realise what's been apparently lost has always existed, just suppressed in the Holy Orthodox Church of Christ
The Council of Trent and the 4th Lateran Council are shining beacons of how great Catholicism is at remaining consistent throughout the centuries. Picking and choosing what you want from your own ecumenical councils and regularly having to point out that the "infallible" popes have a long history of evils and sometimes outright heresy. Let's also not ignore the anti-popes with various levels of legitimacy.
Look at your Catholic head the Pope: he supports gay marriage (forbidden in Romans 1), idolatry (forbidden in Exodus 32), Mary simping (forbidden in Exodus 20:2-5), and so many more stuff that I can write ten paragraphs worth of Roman Catholic heresy.
Please dude, just read the Bible and stop listening to your priest for once.
Amazing video yet again
Great video as always brother
But I have a question how do you make your thumbnails
Baptists formed when the KJV (66-books) descended from the sky in a casserole dish on Pentacost.
💀💀
Ok that is a funny joke
Baptist one true church?????
Ortodoxy is predominational
Just another denomination. The real predenominational church was the early Catholic (Universal) Church which was neither Roman Catholic and neither EO.
@@pedroguimaraes6094 this is dumb, this basically claims that the early church does not exist, which means that the church died, and I've noticed only protestants say this since they are the newest denominations from the 16th century onward
@@pedroguimaraes6094and who is the successor to the early church ?
It can only be Roman Catholic or Eastern Orthodox because the Nestorians and Oriental Orthodox both left the Universal Great Church and protestants broke from Roman Catholicism.
@@pedroguimaraes6094 I can give you many sources of saints from different countries in the world, from the second century, declaring that Peter and Paul went to Rome only to build their church there, and make it the heart of all churches around the world. You can believe that all the apostles can claim to be the early church, but you can’t possible claim that the apostle Andrew is the only rightful one to claim to be the early church, and Peter and Paul came letter.
Apostle Andrew cause he’s the only who did the church of Constantinople, the home of th Orthodox church
Can you explain why the creator told moses the law to do the tabernacle and Jewish customs then sent Jesus and changed those rules?
Would you ever do a video on the New Perspective on Paul?
Love your videos
1:07 Slight mistake. Constantinople became "new Rome" after Rome fell, it wasn't just a feeling that everyone gravitated to the East, it was made official.
Constantine moved the capital of the Roman Empire from Rome to Constantinople in 330 AD, so in a sense it became the the official core of the Roman Empire before its fall.
Chalcedon Canon 28 ayo?
We are the branches and he is the vine, remain in him without him we're nothing 🙏🏾
This was really interesting! Hopefully the grumpy haters aren't discouraging. I really like your content!
"A bunch of calvinists got too calvinist for other calvinists."
A problem that still plagues the various Presbyterian churches to this day
I love that Lutheranism is acknowledged to be the main branch in the thumbnail.
Accidentally based
What is so interesting about it? I mean, lutheranism is basically a "root church" (for the lack of better word) for a pretty big chunk of modern-day churches, therefore it is inherently pretty influential, isn't it?
All protestants use the old testament that Luther decided by himself, he was the council of 1 man to decide the books of the Bible, protestants better praise this man, cause they trust in his judgment above the judgment of multiple bishops from different generations who reunited multiple times over the centuries to discuss the books of the bible, and they all thought different of Luther.
@@matheuscaneta1194 You couldn't be further from the truth. You've been consuming too much pop Roman Catholic apologetics without doing enough research yourself.
Luther did not decide the OT canon by himself. Luther, who is so often accused of personally removing these books, included ALL of them in his translation of Die Bibel as well as the Prayer of Manasseh. That would bring Luther’s total to 74 books. Perhaps Lutherans should accuse Roman Catholics of removing one?
Rome's canon was very much not closed until Trent. This is evidenced by the fact that numerous Roman Catholic clergy did not view the apocrypha as divinely inspired, but good and beneficial to read. Even Cardinal Cajetan, the man who opposed Luther at his hearings and helped draw up the bill of Luther's excommunication, held this view. Here are his own words:
“Here we close our commentaries on the historical books of the Old Testament. For the rest (that is, Judith, Tobit, and the books of Maccabees) are counted by St Jerome out of the canonical books, and are placed amongst the Apocrypha, along with Wisdom and Ecclesiasticus, as is plain from the Prologus Galeatus. Nor be thou disturbed, like a raw scholar, if thou shouldest find anywhere, either in the sacred councils or the sacred doctors, these books reckoned as canonical. For the words as well of councils as of doctors are to be reduced to the correction of Jerome. Now, according to his judgment, in the epistle to the bishops Chromatius and Heliodorus, these books (and any other like books in the canon of the Bible) are not canonical, that is, not in the nature of a rule for confirming matters of faith. Yet, they may be called canonical, that is, in the nature of a rule for the edification of the faithful, as being received and authorised in the canon of the Bible for that purpose. By the help of this distinction thou mayest see thy way clearly through that which Augustine says, and what is written in the provincial council of Carthage.”
In fact, at the Council of Trent, the vote to settle on the 73-book cannon that the Roman church uses today was 24 for, 15 against, and 16 abstained. More people abstained or voted against that canon than actually voted in favor of it. That alone should tell you that the canonicity of the apocrypha was not settled even up through the counter-reformation.
Historically, the church didn't necessarily view the Bible as a set table of contents, but as a rule and guide for the Faith. Lutherans and many orthodox groups actually don't have a closed cannon that specifies the books of the Old and New Testaments. If quelling the Reformation was not the main underlying motive for calling the council of Trent, Rome's cannon most likely would have remained open, too.
@@matheuscaneta1194 Protestants use the OT canon by Melito of Sardis (oldest christian OT canon), with the addition of Esther (even though Esther contains nothing about God & not cited in the NT, it has a typology that many early Christians liked). We see that the councils have contradicted each other over the years and their conflicts have been infected by secular politics. Your councils are not infallible - but they *can* be inerrant.
did you delete your video about types of apologetics or am I having a false memory?
I liked the video, but like your previous "family tree" video, I thought you could have dated when each split occurred. I know for some splits it's not as simple as pinning it to an exact date, but even a rough year range would be helpful to understand the timeline.
Having been raised Church of Christ honestly I think it sounds worse on paper than it actually is. Go to few a CoCs and a few Baptist churches and you’ll be hard pressed to find the difference. Plus despite the initial anti-creedal origins Church of Christ is still Trinitarian with baptisms that even Catholic Church recognizes as legitimate
Right? Worth mentioning that the CoC broke off from Presbyterianism. Very hard to see a difference between the Baptist/nondenominational route of breaking off from a Protestant denomination, mostly rejecting creedalism, embracing a more independent, low church structure, rejecting Lutheran views of communion, and becoming credo-baptist with that of the CoC. I think RZ may just be salty that the CoC was made from a group of Reformed Christians who reformed too hard.
@@Tennishangman perhaps. Although reformed too far might be a little wrong considering they got rid of original sin and predestination
@@bradleymarshall5489 they reformed those doctrines.
Yes, the Catholic church believes once baptized, always baptized. It's a work of God and the Holy Spirit. If a person is baptized in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit. Just a little friendly agreement❤
I just hope he includes baptists with the english separatists ...
Also, the reformed baptists trace their history to the puritans in the Church of England
He puts them splitting off the catholic branch is because he wants to put baptist closer to the nestorian church since according to him they have nestorian tendencies.
Puritans are the real Reformed congregationalists, Baptists split between those who followed a more diluted version of anabaptist's believes (General Baptist) and those who diluted It even more by mixing anabaptist believes with reformed believes (Particular Baptist who started calling themselves "Reformed Baptist in the 1960's). But the Church who really have the same Reformed Theology than Presbyterians and Continental Reformed but with a congregational government is the puritan Congregationalist Church.
Hey RZ! Are you going to make a branch for the Millerites and Joseph Smith😆
Hi. What’s your source that RCCG is a holiness church. To my understanding it is Pentecostal?
Why do you start with Rome when Christianity started in the East (Jerusalem and Antioch)??
🎯
Rome is where Christianity centered around and spready from, also where most of the big meetings and splits occurred.
@@geochonker9052 none of the seven ecumenical councils happened in Rome. The prominent Greek Fathers were from Antioch, Jerusalem, Constantinople, etc.
@@geochonker9052 Rome is extremely important of course, but Christianity did not begin there and the most significant events in early Christianity occurred in the East.
Could you do a video about Messianic Jews. Are they Christian? What separates them from being a Christian?
I did
@@redeemedzoomer6053I think you should use one day of the week to promote your olders videos. People often ask you to do a video you already did.
@@redeemedzoomer6053You technically made a "why you're not a Messianic Jew" video than explaining it itself as a sect of the body of Christ - I know you have bias due to being a Presbyterian but I think it's fascinating because they see themselves as splitting off from Rabbinic Judaism and just continuing post-Second Temple Judaism, with the aspect of Jesus as the Messiah and treating the New Testament as canonical (and most disregarding the Talmud as valid interpretation).
@@zjzr08 Jews have great pride in being a jew, a « i’m not like the others » type of thing. So if messianic juddaism is a way for them to accept Jesus but keeping their special honor title of jew, I’m all for it, for power to them. But in Israel, messianic juddaism isn’t considered juddaism, and even reformed atheists jews can claim nationality but messianic jews can’t.
@@matheuscaneta1194 I know all of that, just saying Messianic Jews don't accept that notion, and disagree that Rabbinic courts should be the standard to determine the age old question of "what is Jew", more arguing it's more about the culture, language and history (and to their perspective, never went away from worshipping the God of Israel).
Nice video brother, we have 5 Oriental Orthodox Churches not 4, you didn’t mentioned the Eritrean Orthodox Church.
No, there are six Oriental Orthodox churches Coptic, Syrian, Armenian, Ethiopian, Eritrean, and Malankara (Indian).
It’s is time for us all to unite the enemy has and is here spread the word as our Lord is sooner to return than we all know
Respectfully, your discussion or RC vs Ortho here displays a poor understanding of Roman History in the centuries concerned here (from Constantine to after Theodosius towards the fall of the West).
Specifically - shortly after Xtianity was legalised and long before it was the state religion, Constantinople was already a more important capitol than the city of Rome from a political-economic stance.
this
Catholic is the OG
orthodox*
Noooo !
What is the Orthodox Church (Eastern Church) and what do Orthodox Christians believe?
The Orthodox Church (Eastern Church) is not a single church, but a family of 13 independently administered branches, dominated by the nation of their domicile (e.g. Greek Orthodox Church, Russian Orthodox Church). They are united by their understanding of sacraments, doctrines, worship and church administration, but each administers its own affairs.
The head of each Orthodox Church is called "Patriarch" or "Metropolitan" (Archbishop). The Patriarch of Constantinople (Istanbul, Turkey) is considered ecumenical - or interdenominational. He is comparable to the Pope in the Roman Catholic Church. Unlike the Pope, who is called VICARIUS FILIUS DEI (the Vicar of the Son of God), the Bishop of Constantinople is known as PRIMUS INTER PARES (the first among equals). He enjoys special honour, but has no power over the other 12 Orthodox parishes.
The Orthodox Church claims to be the one true church of Christ and seeks to trace its lineage back to the apostles through an unbroken chain of apostolic succession. Orthodox thinkers debate the spiritual status of Roman Catholics and Protestants, some of whom consider them heretics (heretics). Like Catholics and Protestants, the Orthodox also favour the Trinity, the Bible as the Word of God, Jesus as the Son of God and many other biblical teachings. However, they have much more in common with Catholics in terms of doctrine than with Protestant Christians.
Unfortunately, the doctrine of justification before God by faith alone is no longer present in the Orthodox Church. The Orthodox Church, on the other hand, emphasises theosis (literally: "deification"), the gradual process by which Christians become more and more like Christ. However, what many in the Orthodox tradition fail to understand is that "deification" is the ongoing result of salvation, not a prerequisite for salvation itself. Other Orthodox characteristics that conflict with the Bible include:
The equal authority of church tradition and Scripture
Discouragement that individuals outside the tradition interpret the Bible
The perpetual virginity of Mary
Prayer for the dead
Infant baptism, without reference to the responsibility and faith of the baptised.
The possibility of receiving salvation after death
The possibility of losing salvation
While the Orthodox Church has produced some great voices and many within the Orthodox tradition have a genuine saving relationship with Jesus Christ, the Orthodox Church does not speak in a clear way to correspond with the good news of Christ and the Bible. The Reformation's call for "Scripture alone, faith alone, grace alone, and Christ alone" is missing in the Orthodox Church and in the Roman Catholic Church, and this is too valuable a treasure to be left out.
You see that the Orthodox and Catholic have the same problems...
God has built a living church, not one of stone and certainly not an institution. The church is the assembly of all believers.
John 3:36: "36 He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him."
I wish you much joy in studying the Word of God
@@FollowerOfTheLight2782 Catholic is the OG. The Orthodox Church was made afterwards from Constantinople, the great schism and excommunication from the Catholic Church
@@Eric-lq6yk read again
The coffee analogy is underrated
For God, who said, "Let light shine out of darkness," has shone in our hearts to give the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ. (2 Corinthians 4:6, ESV) This is the origin of the church.
People worship their church and their denomination, their leaders and priests instead of Jesus, it's sad to see
Unite the Churches and just look forward to Christ and nothing else. Shame on us Christians.
The only reason you know who Jesus is is because of the traditions of Christianity teaching you.
Jesus founded one Church on the Apostles. The traditions of the Apostles are found in no Church but the Catholic Church
no they don't lol
C'est la raison pour laquelle je ne suis plus chrétien
Ex Coptic :)
The Churches of Christ formed from a bunch of Presbyterians in the restoration. Could you not say they are connected to the early church due to this? They confess what is in the creeds but do not do the creeds themselves. In other words, the creeds are upheld just not recited.
I disagree with the videos take on the Restorationist/Stone-Campbell movement because, even if they say they don’t follow creeds, a good chunk of them unintentionally do and are found within traditional Christian orthodoxy, where their beliefs are not too far apart from other Protestant (Mainline, Evangelical, and Fundamentalist) traditions - they’re a decent mix of several denominational traditions then evolved into their own tradition - but then again due to the lack of creeds (or maybe even statements of faith) a lot of bad theology can easily enter without being officially subscribed to by the whole tradition at large. Although some subdivisions within the Restorationist movement like the Church of Christ (I believe) have weird theology around not using instruments in church, certain fundamentalist Presbyterians also share similar weird theology surrounding music in church even to the extent of singing Psalms only like Psalms-only Presbyterians.
And the weird music thing likely came from the CoC being founded by two individuals who were raised Presbyterian.
Exactlyyy
is this going to be a livestream
My brother in Christ, please keep learning and talking. The more you do, the more people will become Catholic and the faster Protestantism will die off. God bless RZ for being the best Catholic apologist!
The first church started in Jerusalem, at Pentecost 33 AD with James the Just chosen as the first pope or leader. That church still exists today, as the Greek Orthodox Patriarch of Jerusalem. St Peter founded the church in Antioch (East Orthodox) 34 AD before starting the church in Rome (Roman Catholic). There were 5 original church Patriarchs. Jerusalem, Antioch, Alexandria, Constantinople, and Rome. During the Great Schism, everyone sided together except Rome, being the lone dissident.
Ty someone with truth
If you want to go back that far then neither Jerusalem, Alexandria nor Antioch are Greek because their real successors are Copts and Syriacs. The Greek bishops of those Sees were imposed by Constantinople.
Good explanation of the Baptists. I believe Baptists come from the Anglicans through John Smyth (1570). Just because they had similar beliefs as the Anabaptists doesn't mean they are from the same group.
It's complicated further by Smyth's decision to become an Anabaptist *after* forming the Baptist church. Thomas Helwys decided not to join the Mennonites, so Baptists never formally merged with Anabaptists to become a single tradition.
Just wanted to know what you think about 7th Day Adventist
Could you do a video on the church of Christ, I think you skip over a lot of it usually
Redeem Zoomer you should make a tier list of every denomination based off their name alone.
So Presbyterians would rank very high on theology... but low on a name teir list. Why is your whole denomination named after old people?
I don't remember someone being called "Presbyterian" before lol.
They have extrenly bad theology
the name sounds like "Preppy therian"
@@Aisjdn he did bro what Bible are you reading
@@henrikvalborgland4556I'm not presbyterian, I'm just curious. What makes them so bad?
I’m very excited to know when my religion fully came from I am catholic
we all know, A.D. 33
1054
"And other hilarious jokes you can tell yourself" @Aisjdn
@@Aisjdn false, jewish lies
@@marcmanolache2106 byzantine cope
3:35 why did you split the continental reformed? Huguenots, German reformed and Hungarian reformed are already the same church, also known as the Swiss/Continental reformed church.
This is why i hold to the idea we are all saved because its honestly a toss up on who is right
I hope this is true but I’m not sure
@Kenny-mu2xb well think of it like thise
Jesus is the Christ
The son of God
And God in flesh
God loved us so much he willingly put himself on earth and lived his life in servitude
And died the most painful brutal death in history of betrayal and had the sins all of them put on him
And God wills that not one person be lost
He loved us to that degree
And if thats true
And he knew the beginning to the end dont you think he would have cleared up the intellectual issues we have today?
Considering most of the gospels share the same message and information id imagine if it was as important as salvation from hell the apostles would have written them down as spoken by our Lord
Thats why i really dont like exclusivist christians (mostly catholic and orthodox). Despite our differences, in the end we praise the same God and have the same principles on essentials. Awful exclusivists 😒.
@@D4rkmatter Let’s be honest with ourselves, we believe in an exclusive Gospel if we believe Scripture. Narrow is the way, few find it, the path to destruction is wide, etc. Knowing the right Gospel message is essential, that’s why Paul says a different Gospel, even if it’s from an angel, should be ignored.
If its a toss up on who is right then it absolutely would not be all saved lmao, the bigger the differences the bigger the separation in salvation
It’s strange how everyone starts with the Roman Catholic Church but not the Armenian Orthodox Church.
The Armenian Apostolics separated from Orthodoxy when they rejected Calcedon, despite being the first christian state.
6:14 this is the most downstate sentence ive heard in a minute lmao
great video also, excellent job summarizing the church denomination history in 10ish minutes!
I'm Messianic, I am wondering if you have a video explaining how the New and Old covenants are separate?
Catholic Church , the one and only , founded by Jesus himself 🙏✝️.
But you disregard Jesus whenever he contradicts your popes.
@@Procopius464 Nope. That’s your point of view.
The pope is a commie
Nah orthodox all the way habibi
@@manuelamavizcanavarro9011 Then why are your priests not required to be married? That's a Biblical requirement from the NT.
I think that's a bit unfair to the Restorationists. I'm non-denominational(specifically, I go to a church in the Independent Christian Church Movement) but they don't think Christianity needs to be rebuilt. There were absolutely some from around the same time who did(7th Day Adventists, the Mormons, etc.) but their thing is more that they feel that creeds distract from the Bible itself. It's more of a "we need to get back to basics and focus on what the Word actually says, rather than dividing over stuff not there" than needing to rebuild it. Ironically, they then split over something not in the Bible, whether it's okay to use instruments in worship.
Exactly. Not rebuilt, restored.
@@mattc.6526 what did they restore exactly? outside of dead heresies
I disagree with the videos take on the Restorationist/Stone-Campbell movement because, even if they say they don’t follow creeds, a good chunk of them unintentionally do and are found within traditional Christian orthodoxy, where their beliefs are not too far apart from other Protestant (Mainline, Evangelical, and Fundamentalist) traditions - they’re a decent mix of several denominational traditions then evolved into their own tradition - but then again due to the lack of creeds (or maybe even statements of faith) a lot of bad theology can easily enter without being officially subscribed to by the whole tradition at large. Although some subdivisions within the Restorationist movement like the Church of Christ (I believe) have weird theology around not using instruments in church, certain fundamentalist Presbyterians also share similar weird theology surrounding music in church even to the extent of singing Psalms only like Psalms-only Presbyterians.
I think the problem is that RZ is Reformed, and the CoC was founded by reformers who reformed too hard and accidentally ended up restoring instead of reforming. When you break off from RZ’s denomination, you don’t get to be Protestant anymore, lol
@@Garry_Combine what heresies are you referring to?
Video on apostolic succession?
Nice summary!
There really shouldn't be any additional sects or denominations if there is one definitive truth.
You really are going to act shocked that a 2000 year old Institution has gone through structural changes as it expanded from hundreds to literal billions of followers? Come on dude.
@@Davidguy57 Shocked? Who's shocked? Fragmenting and alteration is exactly what you would expect from human institutions lacking any genuine, divine guidance. I think what we see makes perfect sense in context.
Notice how the entire point of the video is that each of these agrees on that 1 truth... They just disagree on other secondary issues
@@Fassnight They don't agree as much as they really should and need to. The mentalities and requirements on salvation, redemption, sin, etc, can all vastly differ, to the point where the little they do agree on is little more than a formality for them to barely even identify with each other. Again, if any of them were taking this seriously, there shouldn't be any additional sects or denominations.