Saving the Mainline Churches (w/ Redeemed Zoomer)
Вставка
- Опубліковано 13 чер 2024
- In this video, I'm joined by Richard Ackerman, A.K.A. Redeemed Zoomer, to discuss retaking the mainline churches and restoring them to orthodox Protestantism.
Check out Operation Reconquista: www.operationreconquista.com/
Redeemed Zoomer: / @redeemedzoomer6053
Support Gospel Simplicity:
Patreon: / gospelsimplicity
One Time Donation: www.paypal.me/gospelsimplicity
Merch: shop.gospelsimplicity.com
Follow Gospel Simplicity on Social Media:
Facebook: / gospelsimplicity
Instagram: / gospelsimplicity
About Gospel Simplicity:
Gospel Simplicity began as a UA-cam channel in a Moody Bible Institute dorm. It was born out of the central conviction that the gospel is really good news, and I wanted to share that with as many people as possible. The channel has grown and changed over time, but that central conviction has never changed. Today, we make content around biblical and theological topics, often interacting with people from across the Christian tradition with the hope of seeking greater unity and introducing people to the beautiful simplicity and transformative power of the gospel, the good news about Jesus.
About the host:
Austin Suggs holds a BA in Theology from Moody Bible Institute and is currently pursuing an MA in Liberal Arts with a focus in Theology and Philosophy from St. John's College, Annapolis. He has served in the local church in a number of ways, including as a full-time staff member,, teacher, church planter, and more. Today, he resides outside of Baltimore with his wife Eliza.
Video Stuff:
Camera: Sony a6300
Lens: Sigma 16mm F1.4 amzn.to/2MjssPB
Edited in FCPX
Music:
Bowmans Root - Isaac Joel
YODRSIYIVB5B6QPM
*Links in the description may include affiliate links in which I receive a small commission of any purchases you make using that link.
Chapters:
00:00 - From Secular Leftist to Christian
02:50 - What does it mean to be a leftist?
04:54 - Why restore the Mainline Churches?
12:29 - Why conservatives leave
16:00 - Culture Wars
21:42 - Should we ever abandon a denomination?
26:31 - Which churches should we save?
30:57 - Retaking seminaries
34:42 - What about the kids?
39:28 - Why stay Protestant?
43:45 - Does Protestantism lead to Skepticism?
50:00 - What's next?
53:47 - What's the endgame?
56:38 - Final four
OERNFF59LU4GEU5K
HHQQFUFIBM8K6UIK - Розваги
As an Orthodox, I'd like to point out that we are not anti-intellectual or against using the scientific method to understand the physical world. We do, however, affirm that there are forces we cannot measure and do not fall into the area of scientific dispute/inquiry.
I would not put us in the same bucket as Islam that does not leave much room for nuance and dictates that the Quran must be interpreted literally as the word of God.
Thank you for your comment to correct misunderstandings
We're much more deeper intellectually really, once you learn the theology
Thank you for speaking up for us Orthodox!
Comprehsively literal interpretation within an Orthodox framework can be argued for with the scientific method and rational scrutiny of opposing hypothesi. The truth will win out after all because what's true is true and what's false is a lie and therefore will have errors to find to disprove it. Ahistorical interpretations of biblical narrative have in fact been condemned in such cases like Origen's view of the flood.
But also at the end of the day, you'd still need to put your faith of understanding scripture in the context of the word of God and His church over sons of men and princes of the earth, a lot not even being Christian and against Christianity. So regardless you'd have to put your trust in what the church says and has always said over modern innovations. You can see almost every day the ancient Christians seem to be winning out over the theories and models of today's top secular scientists.
The answer of not becoming EO or RC seems weird. Because of the society? I’d really hope the reason you are in a church has more to do with you believing it’s right.
I think his old leftist side is showing. Material Wealth = Success in his mind it seems
Not to mention that its alot easier to do Sciemce when you aren't actively being hunted or oppressed by Muslims or Communists
RZ just like many RCs worships Western culture. Not God. Religion is just a cohesive cultural or political tool for these people. Many of them would rather be atheists than become Orthodox.
He's a jew so....
The whole point of protestantism, was that all of society be transformed by the gospel. This lead to human flourishing, the rule of law, freedom and democratic societies. Its a form of pragmatic truth and I think its a good defense of the effectiveness of reformed christians in implementing the gospel.
@@OperatioThe former bastions of Reformed theology are now bastions of secularism. Look at Geneva. It was once practically a Calvinist theocracy. Today, over a third of the population of Switzerland is irreligious. Look at New England, once Puritan, now a hotbed of American progressivism. I'm not sure Reformed theology has that great of a track record when it comes to sustaining Christian societies, at least not when compared to either Orthodoxy or Catholicism.
RZ's points about Protestant societies being the most successful or advanced seems like a stretch. Protestantism developing in the way that it did would not have been possible without the invention of the printing press. Also, though I absolutely love Bach, Eastern cultures have their own very well-developed forms of music, such as Byzantine chant. You may say that Byzantine chant is less intricate than Western music, like that of Bach, but this is largely intentional on the part of Eastern Christians, so as to not distract from the text being sung. Also, to say that Muslim cultures are not very advanced is a pretty Western-centric way to look at things. We owe tons to Muslim scholars during the centuries leading up to and during the Renaissance, especially in the field of mathematics. I think it would do RZ good to do a deep dive on Eastern culture and Eastern Christian history to broaden his perspective a bit.
I understand your point of western-centrism and we really need to be aware of our bubble, but the more you study islam the more the religion run from logic and start to rely in contradictions
@@Luuuuanthat's true of Islam today, but I think its been through several phases. It's a net negative imo because it came it the cost of Christianity...but it has its accomplishments in the worldly sense.
Western church music is very feminine and sentimental. Orthodox Church music is masculine, bass dominated. Spiritually invigorating.
@henrik_worst_of_sinners well Russian chant seems very bass driven, but I don't think octave has anything to do with genitalia. Both men and women have a place in the Orthodox church.
@@henrik_worst_of_sinners If you only find one aspect of the human reflection of God (feminine or masculine) spiritually invigorating, then you're not being spiritually invigorated.
two youtubers I really like! Glad you are talking and looking forward to watching this!
Hope you enjoy it!
Make that 3 of my favorites! Not sure how much interest there is among your followers respectively but I would LOVE to see any/all of you interact with the best of the post-supersessionists (e.g. Kinzer, McDermott, Rudolph). I really enjoyed the interview was Thiessen and want to see more!
*with
Wait, so your guest ends his speech with these 2 remarks :
1) He likes communion
2) He thinks it's important to listen to wiser men when you start your journey, and not just read the bible.
But also the same guy... argues 10 minutes against Orthodoxy and Catholicism ! Cognitive dissonance much ?
false dilemma @@goofygrandlouis6296
Is he really suggesting that one should select one’s theology based on subjective notions of what makes a country “successful?” And, he needs to explain how the devil is attacking Protestantism. Where are the modern Protestant martyrs? Where is their persecution? He thinks that the devil bases his attacks on the scientific achievements of a nation state? Do all Calvinists think this way?
It was super cringe-worthy. Glad Austin at least kindly pushed back on his points on the subject.
Well I will give a different perspective about Orthodoxy. The most successful state in the medieval era was The Byzantine empire- the center of Orthodoxy. It had the first universities, highly developed culture, music, architecture. Constantinople was the biggest and richest city at the time. Fast forward to Russia which had one of the best music composers, poets and scientists together with the West. The reason because Eastern Europe is less developed is not because of Christian denomination but because the medieval eastern states were decimated by constant invasions from Asia and most of the Orthodox countries fell under foreign rule and also communism did A LOT of damage and sealed the cultural division between East and West. The countries who happen to colonize the world were Catholic and Protestant but this is purely for geographical reasons not religious. Also the West was protected from the constant Asian invasions and could prosper. The reason because Catholicism and Protestantism is much more spread today is more about luck and geography and not because they are inherently more successful. All three denominations have their contribution and strengths.
And much of the world was converted to Protistantism and Catholicism was done through coersion.
That certainly is a “different” perspective on Orthodoxy. A little pushback; what are these first universities? Looking online I found none under Orthodox area of influence. In fact the only ones I could find were Muslim or Catholic. I’m not saying there were none, just that Orthodox universities have disappeared from history, seemingly.
When the emperor moved to Byzantium he left Rome and its defense in the rearview mirror. Invasion after invasion, Ostrogoths, visigoths, Franks, Huns and Saxons took over without any assistance from Byzantium. Any of them that stayed became Christian. Are these the forced conversions you speak of?
@@mikelopez8564The oldest University was founded in Constantinople at 425 AD, with 31 chairs for law, philosophy, medicine, arithmetic, geometry, astronomy, music, rhetoric and other subjects, 15 to Latin and 16 to Greek. It was the first institution considered as university, in the current sense, and existed until the 15th century. The Muslim and Catholic universities you are talking about are unis who exist even today but they are not the oldest.
And about the second half of your comment, I don't understand it really. Byzantium did not abandon Italy. It was under the control of the Western Roman Empire which collapsed by invasions of Ostrogoths, Visigoths, Franks, Huns and Saxons. Byzantium (ERE) had its own problems at the time. Later under Justinian the Great it reconquered Italy but lost it again after some time. Many of the Germanic tribes adopted Christianity because it was profitable and opened trade and diplomatic relations with other christian countries.
@@mikelopez8564 The oldest universities were Catholic, beginning with the university of Bologna. Unfortunately, modern commentators have tried to misconstrue the word "university" to include religious institutions like the Islamic Madrassas or private academies of the Hellenic world.
Evangelical that migrated into the Anglican (ACNA) church 10 years ago. I am a classically trained musician with a masters degree from an East Coast music school.and also play some jazz. I love the hymns, the historic liturgy, incense, icons, the daily office, etc. that the Anglican tradition offers. We have a choir and a small orchestra in our church( we’re just four years old as a church plant). People are looking for truth, beauty and goodness. Blessings on all those churches that seek to honor God and develop disciples for his kingdom and in this world!
Jay Dyer's reaponse to his recent East vs West video is good.
RZ doesn't even know the basis of the issues.
Nor does he account for EO Western Rite.
The fact you like Jay Dyer is concerning
@@traviswilson36 Regardless of your opinion of Jay Dyer, RZ's analysis of east and west is very poor.
@@matthewgroh8797You do realize the other videos he has on his channel. Some of them include how he believes the elite hide their wealth in the Vatican.
@@matthewgroh8797Jay Dyer has the goofiest content. Look at his non orthodox videos. YIKES
@@traviswilson36They are turning out true though.
Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy on me a sinner.
Operation reconquista has been great. I've learned more about historical protestantism, and I've found a church to attend that I would never had attended. It's given me more hope about retaking Christendom in the West, and not just wanting and waiting for Jesus to come back.
Amen
I'm glad you've had a positive experience with it!
40:20 judging a religion by its secular production is just prosperity gospel writ large. Is a poor celibate recluse who prays constantly less blessed by God than a rich industrialist with 4 children who goes to church once per week?
This guy hasn't studied history very well, but I like his confidence in his lack of knowledge .
39:00 this argument can easily be turned around. I could say that the Catholic Church is the best vehicle for advancing God's kingdom and that's why the Devil keeps attacking it with things like the Protestant rebellion, the French Revolution, etc.
@@thejoshuaproject3809Maybe Sephardic Jews shouldn’t have opened the gates to Visigothic Spain’s capital to invading Muslims armies. Maybe they shouldn’t have continued their alliance with Muslims to oppress the native Spanish Catholics. And maybe they shouldn’t have allied with the rest of Spain’s enemies. You’d be leery of a house guest too if they were constantly undermining ownership of your own home by inviting unwanted guests who want to loot, rape, and kill your family and take over your house.
Really interested to see this. Two of my favorite Protestant youtubers. My take, as a Catholic would be, no*, but if we can't have unity in the Church it would be better for more denominations to be doctrinally orthodox. I definitely respect what he's doing.
That seems like a fair take as a Catholic
Yeah RZ was really rude to me as well. Im a catholic and i was saying that i think what hes trying to do is nice but ultimately, no mainline church has become more conservative. They only trend liberal overtime, that perhaps it would be best to bolster the known conservative denoms.
He shot back with “catholics believe baptism saves apart from faith” i was kind of stunned like, i wasnt even talking about doctrine but youre dead wrong about that and listed several citations from the catechism, early church, and made a logical case for why no catholic has ever believed that. No response….. he was also acting very childish on the James white vs trent horn debate live stream. He said Trent is going on his channel sometime soon. I hope he asks Trent why he belives baptism saves apart from faith. Sola baptisma is not a catholic position but he thinks it is. In fact i heard him make the same false accusation in two other videos.
Incorrect, the entire church (the most mainline church) became Arian in the 4th century and St. Athanasius reformed it despite being excommunicated 5times
@@keelanenns4548 im talking about current doctrine. We all thank st athanasius for his contributions in fighting the arians. Imagine where we’d ALL be without him! To say that catholics currently believe baptism saves apart from faith is incorrect. Again check the catechism if you dont believe me.
@@timboslice980 I wasn’t defending that, only disproving your statement that no mainline church has ever become more theologically conservative. Even after the reformation the Roman church became more conservative and stopped selling indulgences.
@@keelanenns4548 Well im starting to wonder if you think conservative means good and liberal means bad. The Roman Catholic church is always in a state of progression whole remaining conservative. I know that sounds like an oxymoron buts more of a description of how the system works. I’ll give an example: women used to have to have their husbands escort them anywhere outside of the house. Eventually that became permission, and now it’s all but open to allowing women to come and go as they please. My wife for instance makes a lot more money than i do as an artist. My talents allow me to work from home so I basically cook and clean, take care of the kids while she makes all the bank. Im a decent portrait artist and always have work but i dont make a quater of what she does. The point is pre vatican 2 this wouldve been banned by the
Church. Pre vat 1, i may have been excommunicated!
There are traditional catholics who look at my situation and sneer but the church has changed it’s laws on that precisely because of situations like mine. That and worldwide it’s much safer for women to travel about than it was in the old days.
So is the church liberal or conservative on that? Well our stance against women in clergy is iron clad, look at the vows the sisters take. Nuns world wide still display incredible charity, mortification, and dedication to the lord.
So it is conservative in some aspects and liberal in others. Look at the death penalty vs abortion, both are linked and the church has become more aware of that over the centuries. We wont condemn gay people or kick them out of the church but also wont bless their unions or ever consider it marriage.
You see, we try to be as liberal as possible while conserving the doctrines that have held the church up since the beginning. We had african bishops long before america ever bought it’s first slave from there. So the church has never been racist but it has had prejudices that caused it to act less than christian at times.
We progressed away from many of those prejudices and thats a good thing. I feel like mainline Protestants just progress for popularity points. They want to seem inclusive so they change foundational laws to accommodate. We on the other hand progress towards tolerance as mich as possible for them but continually call them to repentance, like francis we think the church is a hospital for sinners. We treat the lgbt like any other patient… whereas either the Protestants expect you to change overnight and shame you for being gay until you leave their church or they bend over so far to let them in that they break their own laws to do. The catholics wont allow that to happen.
Perhaps you have a different point of view. Id be happy to hear it friend! Happy 3rd friday of lent…. Im off to find me a fish sandwich here in town lol. Have a nice day ok?
@@timboslice980 no no no you severely misunderstand me. Conservative as I and as redeemed zoomer is referring to it in this video means Theologically conservative. Or maintaining the orthodox doctrine of the church as written in the apostles, nicene, Caledonian, and athanasian Creeds. I couldnt care less what rules you set for your wives as long as you are fulfilling the God given role of a Husband who loves his wife as Christ loved the church that he gave his life for her. Theological liberalism is when the church starts to pretend certain passages of scripture done exist. Like the passage about those who practice homosexuality and sexual immorality not inheriting the Kingdom of God. It starts there and always proceeds until no true gospel is left behind. Arius was was theologically liberal, he contradicted scripture and refused to be edified by it. Athanasius Defeated him by the grace of God. We should be like Athanasius, even if means we are against the world
RZ’s frequent use of the word hijack is interesting considering. Usually when we use the word hijack, we mean that one person or group is stealing property owned by another person or group. As far as I know, mainline churches weren’t wrested away by outsiders. One could use the same logic to claim the SBC has been hijacked by conservatives to become increasingly conservative.
As someone who has no real investment in Protestant politics, this was super interesting.
It's definitely a bit of inside baseball. Glad you found it interesting!
My two favourite protestants on UA-cam. We need more cross-denomination collaboration, not less. Secular society is trying to destroy the remnants of Christianity. We need to hold strong to our values and Jesus Christ.
If your "leftism" has nothing to do with politics you probably shouldn't call it leftism.
It does seem like an odd choice in terminology to me
Looking forward to this.
Hope you enjoy it!
Great conversation. A few positive points before I get to my major sticking point. RZ is absolutely correct in his assessment of conservatism and its tendency to flee to the hills rather than fight. He is also right in his assessment of leftists, their tenacity, their refusal to accept any setback as final, and the fact that there is never any end point for them. RZ's fighting spirit is spon on and well needed.
The major problem I see with RZ's perspective is that he ultimately holds to a worldly Christianity. To summarize his summary of the gospel at the end of the interview, RZ's view is that the message of the gospel is "to change the world". Not only is this itself fundamentally a progressivist mindset, it is foreign to the mindset of true Christianity. (I am coming from an Orthodox perspective.) The message of Christianity is not to "change the world"; it is "to change ourselves": "Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand." Jesus said repeatedly "My kingdom is not of this world." RZ's summary of the gospel presents this world as the kingdom and the goal is to "reform the world".
Thus, it was not surprising that his critique of Orthodoxy, and one of his supports for the truth of Protestantism, is that Protestants created "the most flourishing societies". Again, this is a fundamentally skewed focus of what the gospel and Christianity is about. The measure of Christianity's success is: does it cause you to live a life of repentance. Wordly "success" of Christianity -- whether measured in scientific, medical, charitable or other societal terms -- is not simply the wrong metric, it is the wrong mindset and focus.
Do not mistake what I am proposing for advocacy of passivity, non-action or failing to engage in both charitable works and engaging in culture wars. It is, rather, ultimately a mindset, an attitude, and an underlying assumption. The Orthodox posture to the world is fundamentally a skeptical and even hostile one (1 Jn 2:15-17; Jam. 4:4). RZ, and really Protestantism as a whole, is this-worldly in its orientation and uses the metrics of the world ("flourishing society") to gauge its "effectiveness" and its success, and even its truth value. But true Christianity does not work this way: "For the wisdom of this world is foolishness with God." 1 Cor. 3:19).
Ultimately, the greatest gulf between Orthodoxy and both Protestantism and modern day Catholicism is not doctrine, ecclesiology, tradition or authority: it is the presence or absence of this mindset ("phronema") and what Seraphim Rose called the "savor" of Orthodoxy.
Creating heaven on earth is the project of progressives, both of the left and of the right. For Christians, whose kingdom is not of this world, this is a game we cannot attempt to play without losing our souls. Again, this is not about not fighting; it is an orientation and an overriding theological assumption that colors and informs ones way of being in (but not of) the world.
For those interested, the best expression of what I am trying to convey here is set forth in Seraphim (then Eugene) Rose's Letter to Thomas Merton. I won't link it to avoid being spxmmed, but you can easily find it at Orthodox Info with a search.
Not to end on a negative note, I will re-emphasize that the analysis RZ makes is trenchent and largely on point, and his fighting spirit is something woefully missing from much of Christianity and conservatism. I wish him well in his project, and also hope he will continue in his pursuit of truth.
I became a Christian just last year and I am grateful to RZ for helping me get 'oriented' in the faith at the time-Christianity can be very daunting to someone new to it. However, after watching Jay Dyer's rebuttal to RZ's latest video on EO, I realized how little I actually knew about Christian theology and history. It seems that RZ needs to take a step back and read more as well before making his claims on EO and giving people the wrong impression of the faith...
I'd also encourage you to read the "catechism of the catholic church". It is steeped in theology and beautifully written
@@bluecomb5376I’m thankful for my studies on Catholic and Orthodox theology. They led me out of the mess that is modern day Protestantism.
@@libatonvhs the only error I discovered was basing your entire theology over some disgruntled ex-Catholic priests from the 1500s
@@countryboyredThe theology of those “1500s disgruntled ex priests” is actually from the church fathers and what the church used to teach. Ambrose,Augustine,Basil the Great,Chrysostom, many more and even late Middle Ages theologians like Anselm of Canterbury and Duns Scotus believed in God’s sovereignty and predestination.
@@libatonvhs reformed theology is from the 1500s and has nothing to do with historical Christianity. My mind is made up after 20 plus years of intense research. I encourage you to read the church fathers. Hint: the ancient church wasn’t Presbyterian
I’m glad your guest is working hard to get rid of heresy (it’s heresy not leftism). The scripture calls all of ‘heretical teaching by this term.
One correction…
Orthodox Christianity is responsible for the greatest missionary work in History up until the 800 years of Ottoman oppression and later Communism rule.
Until 1054, there was no separation between Rome and Constantinople. Orthodox missionaries translated scripture into the language of the people often creating alphabets (Church Slavonic and native Alaskan languages).
You can’t imagine that the reformers brought Christianity to Africa, Russia, the Middle East or do you?
Flip that upside down and insert Orthodox Christianity bringing Christianity to everyone including pagan Europe.
Missionaries went as far as Japan (relics have been found in caves).
My Aunt and Uncle were Wycliffe Bible Translators and they didn’t allow Orthodox Christians to be missionaries.
Catholics have been the most successful Christian missionaries, not the Orthodox. It’s the reason why we are the most numerous Christian denomination. We’re larger than even the Protestant and Orthodox populations combined.
I would argue that the Orthodox falling to Muslims and Communists was chastisement from God for being in schism with the one, holy, catholic, and apostolic Church. As St. Robert Bellarmine said:
And so that they may understand that the cause of their fall is their stubbornness in error about the procession of the Holy Spirit, Constantinople was taken, the Emperor killed, and the empire wholly extinguished by the Turks on the very feast of the Holy Spirit. For as Gerard Mercator proves in his Chronology, in the year 1452 on the 26th day of May Muhammed ordered his army to the final attack and on the following day he took Constantinople. But in that year the feast of Pentecost was on the 28th of May, as is plain from the bronze number and the dominical letter by which movable feasts are examined. For the bronze number is 8 and the dominical letter is A. Therefore many compare the Greek Church to the kingdom of Samaria, which separated itself from the true temple and was at length carried off into perpetual captivity.
@@FideiDefensatrix I don’t want to pile on, but there is no Constantinople, only Istanbul, and when I visited the city in 2010 it did cause me great sadness. The possibility that God would chastise the schism in the East in a manner resembling the Jewish loss of the temple, and then the Temple Mount altogether would sober anyone. Lord have mercy.
@@FideiDefensatrix
Oh but you do want to pile it on. It’s called triumphalism… being smug, boastful and superior.
Larger isn’t an indicator of success.
Unlike Eastern Orthodox, you weren’t under the foot of the Ottoman Empire for 300 years after being sacked, raped and plundered by the ‘Christian’ Crusaders.
Christian Missionaries went to Alexandria, Ethiopia, Syria, Russia, Alaska, Greece (to name a few), from the Middle East, not Rome…because there wasn’t an established Church for the first 300 years. The first Meeting of the Church and the edict of Milan WAS in Constantinople.
Stop denying history.
Compare these statistics.
At least 21 million people are believed to have died in persecution campaigns and "terror famines" after the 1917 revolution, including 106,000 Orthodox clergy shot during the Great Purge alone, according to Russian government data.
A total of 422 Catholic priests were executed, murdered or tortured to death during the period, along with 962 monks, nuns and laypeople, while all but two of the Catholic Church's 1240 places of worship were forcibly turned into shops, warehouses, farm buildings and public toilets.
Tens of millions of Christian’s (most Orthodox) died in the gulag.
I don’t think you know anything about Orthodox History or Evangelism. Most in the West don’t care about anyone but themselves.
The Byzantine Empire was a secular state, yes it was based on Orthodoxy, but no secular states are meant to last forever, the Church is. And Eastern Orthodoxy has has been unmoved despite the onslaught of Islam and Communism. I’m not even Orthodox and this is just a bad argument.
Oh man, I was wondering and had hope you guys would put your heads together.
Nominalism philosophy gave birth to Protestantism AND modernism. The guy is fighting modernism, but calling it liberalism.
Bro the first nominalist were catholics, luther was a realist, get out of the bubble and go read more, but i will not do the same claim that "catholicism created nominalism" because i would not be honest, these things don't grow out of nowhere, or only one thing alone
@@Luuuuan it’s only true because there were only Catholics in Europe when William of Occam got the ball rolling. He was wrong about some things of course but he didn’t start his own religion.
Catholics started pretty much everything for 1500 years.
By the way, you should investigate your claims. Luther relied on nominalist theories.
@@mikelopez8564 first, no protestant claim to have other religion, our God has literally the same ontology of the Catholic one, in the Lutheran confession is said that the intention is not to depart with " the catholic faith" i dare you to find a single reformer who claim to depart with tradition, you can accuse us of being wrong, of not being consistent, but say that we don't care/don't use tradition, is the same a pentecostal evangelical call Catholics idolaters of mary or that they don't read the bible
. "I demand arguments not authorities. That is why I contradict even my own school of Occamists, which I have absorbed completely." - Martin Luther, 1520
Would love to see the mainline churches revived. It would solidly and hopefully lead to greater unity among Protestant
Their is NO unity among Protestants.
30,000 " churches"
None can agree on proper interpretation of Scriptures
This is the only protestant video I've seen with pretty solid objections to Catholicism
Fantastic!
Very interested to see where this conversation goes, as a traditional Anglican.
I used to kind of enjoy RZ, reminded me of me 15 years ago, but he has lost his mind with regard to Eastern Orthodoxy and since his debate with Jay Dyer his "damage control" has only worsened things.
Simp
@@traviswilson36nope just fax
"Damage control?" It wasn't even a debate and RZ was gracious for the vast majority of the Dyer assault. 😂. Why is it that the Ortho bros sound so much like the Dawah bros when dealing with contrary view points? The tough guy routine is so tired. RZ is self-effacing and learning quickly. He is also sharing more interesting and helpful conversations than almost any other Christian youtuber lately.
@@davidbell7137Orthobros are just mad the Western World has always been more influential and advanced than Russia ever has. Eastern Orthodox immigrants migrated to the Protestant West for a better life but Protestants never needed migrated to the East or any other place.
I admire his zeal and I wouldn't want to quelch that at all, but the comments on societies seemed a bit simplistic. Islam and cultures to the east have contributed to science at times in history. Western Europe while making huge contributions in latter centuries, have also brought with the industrial age, the commidification of the human person. Abuse and exploitation have come with colonization. Some of the outlooks did seem a bit dualistic/ Manichaean.
I still like what he's doing though, and I agree with his thoughts on institutions.
Interesting conversation, best of luck to you Richard from an Eastern Catholic. I truly hope you succeed, I'd be happy to see the mainline protestant denominations return to their roots.
No thanks. We like not having to listen to the Pope telling us what to do all the time. Even so, we love you guys too. Keep on fighting the good fight of faith.
@@Breakdowns04tell me you don’t understand papal infallibly without telling me you don’t understand papal infallibility.
It was meant as a joke. I am fully aware that the pope can only teach ex cathedra in very specific situations.
Austin, have you ever heard of Calvin Robinson, you should definitely get him on.
55:00 or, or, even better....one Catholic Church, so all of y'all can come on home.
Problem is that many millions of Christian’s don’t consider Rome to be the exclusive “Catholic Church”. Many prots already feel like they are a part of the catholic (universal) church and Orthodox believe they are the “real” Catholic Church and Rome left the faith over 1000 years ago. So specify what you mean by “Catholic”. I assume you mean Rome?
I have been a Christian for 42 years and have rejected many things that were part of my former liberalism while retaining because of Christ many other things. I'm curious if our brother would disdain, for example, the civil rights movement, which was stymied by the SBC and thought to be a terribly liberal capitulation to culture. My concern is that perhaps he doesn't recognize that in almost all things, Fidelity to Christ Jesus and his word is possible via a Third Way of the Cross that seeks only Christ
Best crossover ever
Hope you enjoy the video!
43:45 There where two Enlightenments. One that was centered around Catholic France and lead by thinkers such as Rousseau, Malebranche, and Descartes, and lead to French Revolution. There was another centered around Protestant Britain and lead by thinkers such as Newton, Bacon, and Locke and lead to the Glorious Revolution of 1688 and the American Revolution.
Best crossover since jimmy neutron and Timmy turner
😂
The answer is yes.
Please don't listen to Richard regarding Eastern Orthodoxy. He is quite ignorant about even very basic aspects of Orthodoxy. And, quite frankly, he doesn't seem interested in understanding it properly.
RZ has been shockingly rude to me and other orthodox Christian’s in the past. I like Austin a lot more. Austin is my favorite UA-cam Protestant.
I was surprised by RZ's comments in the live chat for the sola scriptura debate between Horn and White. He appeared to lack humility.
It's possible he came across differently than intended. I have seen his humility and patience on display with Jay, Kyle and the Oriental guys.
Lion's Den, I mean
@@davidbell7137 ESPECIALLY Jay…my introduction to that guy was unfortunately a 2 hour long “conversation” with Redeemed Zoomer that was mostly Jay rudely interrupting RZ and talking down to him - even at one point implying to RZ that he “can’t talk about the Trinity” simply because he had yet to read any of the Cappadoccian Fathers. 🙄
RZ was very gracious from what I remember, but I also didn’t finish that whole 2 hour marathon essentially featuring Jay Dyer’s monologue of why he’s infallible. If I was not already a Christian or one who was deconstructing, I for sure would not want anything to do with Jesus (or may leave the faith) after hearing the likes of Jay speak so arrogantly regarding matters of faith.
All that to say that I agree with your comment that I’ve read/heard positive interactions from RZ.
RZ just went on rabbit trails and completely failed to answer the questions or outright refused.
Jay put his feet to the fire and RZ broke and in retaliation started affirming heresy as a gotcha.
This guy maybelieve he is on the right path but secularism, liberalism and maxism are all very different concepts. Mashing them up together is inacurate to say the least and dangerious if take to its extremes.
Well, there is only one Church, Christ’s Holy Catholic Church, so all people should join the Pillar of Truth that has defined perfectly faith & morals. But overall the reality is many may not convert to the Catholic Church and so any Protestant trends towards the Truths of Catholicism would be better than what is happening now is many churches being lost to enlightenment thinking.
I really wish the RC would return to pre Vatican 2 era, modern day RC was the result of modernism because of Vatican 2.
Protestants have the richest counties because they prioritized material wealth.
They closed the monasteries because they weren't "productive enough"
I think protestant societies were more materially wealthy because thats what they valued, wealth. Is that good or bad? Thats a value decision.
I'd be curious to hear his thoughts on Weber's The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism.
As someone else said I think his claim that protestantism is responsible for the most successful countries is a stretch and a big stretch at that and can only really be applied to the English speaking World and thats only five major countries. Europe remained largely Catholic. Despite the communist blip one can hardly call Russia a cultural backwater and they are orthodox.
Definitely conflicted on this one. I think there are protestant churches that have wonderful traditional roots even if some of their theology is incorrect. Looking forward to the conversation.
Theology is more important. Choose theology in a hut over anything
All the countries he listed that were sent Protestant missionaries already had Catholic presences, it's such a strange argument.
I really cannot stand RZ’s argument that the financial success of the “west” by which I guess he mostly means colonial era Western Europe and now America in the modern world has anything to do with the validity of Protestantism.
Western Europe became rich in large part because of their industrial enterprises at home and their colonial exploits abroad. To put it bluntly, both of these movements involved a whole lot of deeply unchristian exploitation of people. As a Christian it really disturbs me that someone would want to extend the wealth earned through sin and exploitation to an argument that the Christians who participated in this system were somehow being more faithful to God than Christians who didn’t.
To me, the exact opposite would be true. The great wealth of colonial Europe is a mark against their faithfulness to God, not points in favor of it.
The west was undergirded by Christian principles; the USA is a product downstream of Protestant individualism...that lead eventually to the Constitution.
In a strong way, the west has been strongly influenced by Christian values of Protestantism
If this is supposed to be a modern day crusade, then where are the tanks and the violence?
Most of the mainline is beyond saving at this point. Case in point, my denomination’s focus now is on anti-racism a la the progressive view of it. The lenten devotional put out by the national setting is literally called Woke Lent. I think that individual congregations may be able to stave off the decline in their own particular context but as a whole most of these denominations have already jumped off the cliff. As for the buildings, all one has to do is wait for them to close, this year already two in my area have announced their coming closure.
I kind of had the same thought, why don't we just wait and push our conservative congregations to purchase the historic buildings? Seems like an easier way to take them back
Richard talks very well and makes some great points. But there is a _glaring_ inconsistency when he explains his choice of Protestantism over Catholicism........
His whole schtick is that true Christians should stay in the Church they are in (when "corruptions" happen) and _save the institution._
But, if Luther, Calvin et al had followed this principle ....... _there would be no such thing as Protestantism._ By Richard's principle they should have stayed and supported the reforms that did in fact occur in the Catholic Church. And indeed this was Luther's original aim he claimed.
Also, Richard's choice of Protestantism over Catholicism.... "because Protestant countries were better or acheived more" was WAY BELOW his general level of reasoning.
The Protestant Revolution fostered individualistic capitalism and that has produced some wealthy countries but that is not the "fruits" to judge by.
If we judge by the "goodness, truth & beauty" he mentions Catholicism can be seen as the more authentic. Catholicism invented Universities, Hospitals, the scientific method, and international law.
It's music in not second to Protestant music, and its architecture & worship superior. More importantly its saints and mystics are mind-blowing compared to the protestants and its scientifically-tested miracles & signs abound. Richard mentions the missions, but here again Protestants were late to the party and often merely focus on "sheep-stealing" Catholic Christians in RC countries.
And as for demonic-attack showing the true church........ what is Satanic Worship? A Black Mass hopefully with a Catholic-consecrated host to defile.
Honestly I think if Richard remains open, honest and consisten he is headed to Rome.
While I appreciate the idea, my concern is submitting my wife and family to possibly heretical teachings of these mainline churches. I was raised in the Church and like to think of myself as theologically well versed but my wife is still a newer Christian who's still learning and growing in her faith. I don't find the risk necessary
You're certainly not alone in this struggle! I'm Catholic but have been paying attention to what has been going on in the CoE and in Protestant denominations here in the US. It's going to be quite the ride for the next century or so!
I’m on his side as a fellow Western Christian supremacist, but for as much as we like to accuse Orthobros of LARP, much of RZ is doing does feel very strongly like a LARP. I don’t even think he believes in his reconquista vision, I think he just found a clever way to cope with the sad state of Protestantism. I’m also not convinced by his defense against the argument that the Protestant reformation opened up the flood gates for modernity. I think this genealogy can be pretty clearly laid out.
Protestantism--> led to strong sense of Individualism--> founding of the States--> all that + every other factor as well, but including Protestantism--> modernity
I wish we could reconquista the unitarian universalist church. Its depressing to see what my universalist father's bulit be taken by unitarians who hate Christ.
47:53 made me laugh
Traditional Episcopalians do exist, though we are few and far between. There is a magazine called “The Living Church” that serves as an orthodox lighthouse in an increasingly liberal denomination. From what I’ve seen in my Diocese the younger clergy tend to lean more traditional than the retiring clergy. The Bishop Spongs of our Church are slowly fading out.
Really? That's refreshing to hear as a Catholic. I don't go out of my way to hear anything about Episcopalians, but if I do, the only good things are Church music pieces (I just listened to the St James Church in LA's rendition of Jesu the very thought of thee) and everything else well...yeah. May the Holy Spirit guide us all
@@isaiah3872 my religious history is rather diverse. I attended a Catholic parish for about three years before giving up on faith during the pandemic. My story is very similar to the Parable of the Sower. When I had my conversion experience I landed in a small Episcopal Parish rather unintentionally. I still have a deep admiration for the Catholic Faith, but I am an Anglican through and through. Anyways, traditional clergy and parishes do exist. Trad clergy tend to come out of Nashotah House.
Why was it always conservatives leaving? Well there was one exception. That occurred in the Lutheran Church Missouri Synod in the 1970's. The conservatives stayed and the liberals left and tried to form their own seminary (Seminex). They eventually ended up on the merged liberal churches that formed the ELCA.
Western Churches spread across the globe with the strong arm of colonialism and imperialism. And honestly, is the meaning of life acquiring newer stuff. And I wouldn’t attribute all of modern innovations to “Protestantism.” I think that is certainly painting history in very broad strokes.
As I see it, Protestantism paved the way for innovation and development by decentralizing religious influence and creating a space for secularism. This is well documented in “A Secular Age,” by Charles Taylor. Protestantism helped bring about the things Richard is bringing up here by desacralizing culture and - ultimately - de Christianizing it. Likewise, the French Revolution was heavily influenced by the American revolution and the pamphleteering of English social reformers. The Catholic Church was seen as the problem by the French Revolutionaries. They were far from Catholic. Likewise to think French society at this time was unanimously united around the Catholic Church is radically undermined by this fact alone. Redeemed Zoomers historical understanding here is not very nuanced at all.
It is clear as day that Reedemed Zoomer has no knowledge about missionary history. It was the protestants that thought christianity to Korea? How? It was catholic missionaries. To Japan? Eastern Orthodox. To Africa? The Apostles.
Also, how protestant societies have been the most developed? I guess by "protestant societies" you mean America, and it is just American thing to think they are the most developed society ever. Unless by developed societies you mean covering everything in concrete.
I'm okay with you being sceptic to apostolic churches, since you were born in protestant culture, but please, don't spread america-centered misinformation
I thoroughly enjoyed watching this video. With all the Christian Denoninamation Rhetorical Debate aside...Jesus Christ was Jewish and all other Christians are Gentiles including me.
It's interesting to hear Evangelicals say that they do not support Protestantism...
I suppose not All Evangelicals consider themselves Protestant
Yes, the Original Protestants would be the Magisterial Reformation, which would be the Lutherans, Anglicans and the Reformed(Calvinist), while there was another one called the Radical Reformation, modern day Evangelicals are the descendants of the Radicals, while the Reformed(Calvinist) became more Radical, the Anglicans and the Lutherans on the other hand remained consistent that's why they look more alot like Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox.
Time-stamp
3:47 - I like this definition of “leftism”.
Saying protestants cinverted Africa is a bold statement considering half of Christian africa is catholic or coptic and a significan t portion of protestant efforts in Africa is converting other Christians, saying protestantism converted latin america is just insulting, Our Lady of Guadalupe was converting millions a hundred years before presbyterians were anything of notice.
I would have liked to have heard him answer the question regarding the Southern Baptists. He just kind of ignored it and went on about fundamentalists.
In fairness, that wasn't on our outline so he might not have felt prepared to answer that.
@@GospelSimplicity Fair enough. Though it would have been interesting for him to actually engage with the SBC conservative resurgence given its one of the few successful examples of what he hopes to attempt.
You’re not going to reclaim the mainline Protestant denominations. The chance of mobilizing those that left to come back en masse and recapture them is near zero.
Just come back home to the original Church, whether RC or OC. Done. Problem solved.
They’ve been there waiting the whole time.
Jay Dyer evaporated him
As an Episcopalian I think this is a bit of a straw man of mainline Protestant Christianity. The Episcopal Church has always and still holds to the historic creeds of the Church (Nicene, and Apostle Creed). Our different Hermeneutics coupled with Anglican Stool have just led us to a different belief about women clergy and sexual ethics.
We have the creeds, we recite them but few understand or believe them in any serious way.
We have the same vocabulary but use different dictionaries. I've been an Episcopalian for almost 50 years and all I've seen is decline and decay.
@@kevinmorgan8534 this is a really uncharitable comment and I hope you think better of your siblings in Christ who disagree with you.
Which part of his comment is uncharitable? He's an Episcopalian and is talking about having personally observed people not really understanding the creed they recite. Is he not entitled to his opinion about his own denomination? @lch6192
Some would say that’s where the Episcopal Church has gone off the rails. Plus those clergy who were influenced by Pike and Spong who did depart from historic Christianity into heresy
@@briandelaney9710 Bishop Spong is out of the norm for the vast majority of Episcopalians, with dioceses making it clear after him that you have to affirm the creeds to be ordained. When Bishop Spong was elected and consecrated Bishop he affirmed the creeds, and once he stooped holding them he should have resigned.
You should reach out to Kyle
Kyle who?
@@GospelSimplicity his channel is called Kyle
Yes please
No
@@jdsmith2k7 He does not make good content. It is just loud noises and memes.
I’m a new Christian so technically I’m Protestant, but his reasoning about Orthodox countries not being as economically developed as Protestant countries as a reason for Protestantism being correct is so ridiculous…
firstly it goes without saying that that has nothing to do with the truth or falsity of the argument.
secondly, japan is shinto, china is buddhist/atheist and they’re both economically developed countries with great musicians, technology and universities. All done without the influence of Christianity.
Thirdly, orthodox countries were crushed under the weight of communism and constant war and tribulation for so much of their history. What does that have to do with the truth of their religion? They still have great composers like tchaikovsky & Rachmaninoff, and arguably the best author of all time, Dostoyevsky. This seems like a completely idiotic and subjective way to find truth in doctrine.
“The devil attacks us most” by which metric? Your own subjective opinion again. In my country the Catholic church is the one that’s constantly demonised and slandered on TV. Basically hear nothing about protestantism. Just a very strange and subjective way to get your doctrine
Basically the Catholic Church is whacky because it fights itself, while most Prots have split.
To be fair, we've always done that.
The Catholic Church always has, is, and always will be reforming itself under the guidance and protection of the Holy Spirit. Hence no need for a so called Protestant reformation. They reformed nothing. They merely grabbed the Catholic Bible, removed 7 books and began making their own churches with their own popes and multiplying like gremlins.
@@specialteams28 -- This is exactly true. It's how I read "fighting itself". Right from the very first reformation (Paul vs Peter re associating with non-Jews), the Church has been in a constant state of renewal, of reformation.
Where Luther and Calvin and Co got it wrong is, as you say, actually leaving the Church.
I agree. The RCC is reforming itself. But it also struggles against internal opposition that the Protestant churches ran from. Which is why the RCC sometimes looks so messy. But as Redeemed said, the conservatives in the the Protestant community ran and are stuck in small rafts with no institutional power.
Problem is the mechanism the God gave the church in scripture was kicked to the curb by Protestantism. Scripture gives us in the Gospel of Matt the way the church is to handle error. When you can no longer recognize "The Church" you cannot bring anything before it. From the Acts of the Apostles the Church would gather in council to pray, discern, to make a decision on issues. What happens in Protestantism two sides bump up against one another, argue over scripture interpretation, the split. This has finally had the catastrophic results for Christianity overall. Unity is the only way to save the Church, unfortunately there is no way to unify Protestantism without stopping Protestantism. While Protestantism has beneficial value, but it has sealed its own fate. It is time to give up on Protestantism!! The answer is clear, May they all be one! One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church.
Spliting is bad but the truth that the Church is not infallible, that there is not "One True Church" and that the Bible is the only infallible Word of God remains. The are still plenty of orthodox Protestants Churches and in the end in the day is better to have a right biblical gospel than a corrupted one. Whatsmore, the curently situation is more an US / Europe circunstance, since here in Brazil we do not face the same problems with Theological Liberalism and the mainline Presbyterian Church remains conservative for almost 200 years.
Pray big or go home!
Well said @mack
Exactly- One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church- aka the Orthodox Church. Come home brothers and sisters☦️
@randyorlando67 Home sweet Rome. Hopefully soon, east and west can restore full visible unity and get over all the baggage history drags with it. Pax
Redeemed Zoomer copes so hard
I think Richard's historical argument after 39:00 is a bit off. I concur that the Church is and has long been under attack: obviously. We're witnessing the continual fall of all the great Protestant traditions, including the recent nose dive of the Church of England. Those have been falling since the 1500s. Orthodoxy has, in a way, already fallen: ever since the 4th century, the Eastern Church has become more and more intimately bound up with secular power. Even now, Orthodox Churches tend to be national in character, and we can see the evidence of the secularism of the Orthodox Church by watching who is at official functions. For example, in Russia, when Putin gives a speech, the Patriarch is either on the stage or at the front of the audience. How can the Moscow Patriarch support Putin's war in Ukraine, while the Kievan Patriarch does not? Orthodoxy's fall is not due to leftism or liberalism, I think, because the Orthodox Churches maintain the Apostolic faith and traditions, they continue to have right worship and almost all of the hallmarks of the Church that Christ founded. The only bastion left is the Church itself. Rome. The Catholic Church.
As to Richard's correlation, I don't believe that entirely makes sense historically. All of those scientific and mathematical and cultural advances literally come out of the broad Catholic culture of western Europe, which is an inheritance bequeathed to Protestantism. Just to get some things straight, Gutenberg was a Catholic and the Bible he printed and disseminated was Catholic. Catholics didn't just suddenly convert to Protestantism once they got hold of a Bible --- they had the Bible already! It was Catholic missionaries who brought the gospel to Africa (in the first century to North Africa; by the 4th century to Ethiopia; 1500s to the southern interior); the OOC had made inroads into China by the 800s; the Catholics were in SE Asia by the 1500s and in Korea and Japan by the 1700s; and of course, Catholics were spreading the Gospel throughout the Americas from the late 1400s; and North America got its first bishop and first cathedral in the 1100s. All of the math and science that had developed since the fall of the ancient world was largely done by Catholics. The just and fair societies made (in particular by the English) base all of that on Catholic ideals, whether we're looking at basic liberties or the dignity of the individual, rights to property and income. These aren't new to Protestantism.
As for Satan attacking Protestantism, vs Catholicism or Orthodoxy (Islam is a different kettle of fish), I think it would be fair to argue that he toys with Protestantism now because it's low hanging fruit. By nature and by definition, Protestantism is rebellious. This is just a matter of history. There is no denying that the Church was in need of reform in the 1500s, but Protestantism itself was born out of resistance to the divine institution of the Church. This I think was clearly an attack on the Church, and the result was a "culling of the herd" if you will. Get some people away from the Church that Christ founded and they become easy pickings. All the subsequent attacks on Protestantism follow logically: sow the seed of discord; get a few to rebel and reject the Church; let their ideas evolve and morph into things like humanism and marxism and modern liberalism and now feminism, genderism, racism, etc. What we see now going on in the Protestant churches is nothing more than reaping the social and spiritual chaos that was sown 500 years ago.
Islam, Mormonism, etc: I think the response to Richard's point on Islam is "how can Satan cast our Satan"? Islam was recognised by the Church as a very serious heresy in the early to mid 700s. Why would the author of lies seek to attack one of his greatest fallacies? Mormonism comes out of Protestantism: Smith's created religion is so divergent it too can no longer be considered Christian. JWs are a rehash of another old heresy, Arianism.
As I see the history, these aren't so much "attacks" because Protestantism is so dangerous to the devil, but rather, these things are the results of the chaos he likes to sow.
This was an excellent response.
I completely disagree. Rome fell, not the Orthodox. You guys have been dealing with heresies, enlightenment thinking, scandals that I can’t even name or else my comment will get taken down, wicked Popes, etc etc for over 1000 years. The Orthodox Church has its problems but it is doing just fine without Rome. Rome needs to repent and become Orthodox. The Church was never governed by one supreme pontiff- it operated in a synodal manner.
@@bluecomb5376 -- Thank you!
Saving mainline Churches from What? Heresy? That’s not possible as they were born of it. I was made aware of a quote recently from Martin Luther himself from 1525 “There are as many sects and Beliefs as there are heads”. He goes on the say “There is no Rustic so rude, but that, if he dreams or fancies anything, it must be the whispers of the Holy Ghost and he himself a prophet”. The hypocrisy would be as firm as concrete except of course Luther qualifies and limits his comment to “rustics” which obviously excludes himself. Seriously, Luther simply latches onto the heresy of the Papacy which wrested authority away from the Holy Spirit doubles down and grants that authority to himself while firmly acknowledging the slippery slope he’s standing on but still can’t recognize its ramifications.
The answer is no.
Why not? (I’m genuinely curious, not sarcastic)
@@davymarcelo3901Just a troll ignore him
The answer is no, but what is the question?
I was always told the answer was 42.... 😅
Oh God ….
A lot of respect for Redeemed Zoomer. Is he the only person brave enough to speak out about the hijacking of mainline churches by progressive ideologues?
No there’s a whole movement speaking out against it.
It's not news to anyone, but he may be among the few who are trying to take them back. Most people who care about truth have given up on them entirely
@@BigTrollingMando you mean the movement that he started or one in the broader society? I genuinely don’t know. I personally haven’t noticed any other movements like that other than the one he is starting
Why do protestants feel the need to "reinvent the wheel" with Christianity? If Christ, the divine author and architect, the Word made flesh, said "you are Peter and on this rock i will build MY church", why would we NOT trust that he says what he means? Do we follow Christ's teachings or NOT? We can trace, that Church (the Catholic Church) from Peter to today. Protestants, who harp on sola scriptura, can't even agree on vital teachings. Wasnt sola scriptura supposed to bring Christians together? Did it?!!
Fundamentalists and leftists were two sides of the same coin. Couldn’t agree more
How can protestantism really be a threat to Satan? An unpure thing is apparently a threat to the most unpure creature because of the thing's purity?😂
protestantism is only doing what satan wanted all along: the splintering of Christs church that he founded on St. Peter
@@bluecomb5376 It's Satanic.
Seems to me like this is the logical conclusion of the Protestant instinct (as opposed to the Fundamentalist instinct). Don't like the current state of your church? Just leave and go start your own. There is no incentive to reform your own denomination. Come home to Rome. :)
Christianity is not meant to succeed under theological liberalism. Why are there no denominations in the Bible? Because Christ only established one church: "you are peter and on this rock i will build MY church." In the garden he prayed that "they be one as we are one." ...not hundreds
I would also like to point out that I formed my own religious thoughts based on the concepts from all religions that actually work for life, and not these christian hate pipe dreams
His take on Protestantism at the end is laughable, I don't think any historian would have that take.
Neoconservative thinktank bs
Pitiful argument against Orthodoxy
Getting ready to unsubscribe. What a goofy video. Why wouldn’t you save churches? The alternative is having people not hear the word of God. Shame on you for this “content”
His answer was yes, so you'll be un subscribing for imaginary reasons
@@ContemplativeSoulok bye
@@traviswilson36I find it hypocritical how you bash both Kyle’s and this channels content while you yourself haven’t posted a single video to your channel. The only content I’ve seen from you has been spamming comment sections. Not trying to be rude but I’d recommend some self reflection.
@@therealmiles453 cry me a river
@@traviswilson36 I genuinely meant that I wasn’t trying to be rude in my first comment. It seems to me you have quite a bit of free time to be writing all these comments, that’s a wonderful blessing. I just think It’s a shame you spend so much of it complaining about Kyle and others . I hope that you find a way to use the time that you have for something more positive. God bless you and I hope the best for you. 🙏☦️