I started my Orthodox journey a few months ago. Your videos have given me hope. I have been involved with Protestantism for a great deal of my married life. But I have always read my bible for the last 44 years and I have come to the realization of the heresy of Protestantism and this video has confirmed my recent discoveries. I will no longer champion the destructive lies I once believed. Thank you father.
So proud of you brother! I too have been in Protestantism my whole life but hope to become orthodox Christian by the end of this year. I long for the one true church
Спасибо отец Иосия за слово! Хочу поделится свой радостью. Я в детстве был эстонским лютеранином, прошел конфирмацию. В 16 лет всей семьей перешли в Православие, но бабушка не захотела этого и осуждала нас за предательство веры. Спустя 15 лет перед смерью бабуша устала от лекарств и отказалась их есть. Мама пригласила лютеранского пастора для того чтоб он ее приободрил и сказал что нужно принимать помощь врачей. После его ухода мама опять поговорила с бабушкой и она согласилась принять Православие. Теперь я имею счастье молится соборно о душе бабушки Музе. Слава Богу!
@@dustinneelyits not ironic, at all, but fully logical. Truth unites those who want the Truth, and divides those who want it from those who dont want it.
Thank you, Fr. Josiah! I’m a recent convert to Orthodoxy from Roman Catholicism. God is using you and Dr Eugenia Constantinou teaching our faith in easy to understand with references to the Bible, oral tradition, church fathers.
Interesting talk; content that I will most earnestly and sincerely consider. After having served as a Protestant pastor and missionary (Russia 1992-1996), for 23 years, I left pastoral ministry in 2015. My formal education was in biblical studies and Greek. For the past few months I’ve picked up my Greek New Testament and also have read extensively writings from the Church fathers. For the past 9 years I’ve been adrift, so to speak. While there are a number of theological barriers that I’ve yet to overcome, Orthodoxy has a definite appeal to my heart. Please pray that the issues that I am dealing with be resolved in my heart and mind. Sincere respect and humble gratitude.
Father bless. I hope you understand the impact that your videos have on the Internet. There’s so much garbage on the Internet. It’s so refreshing to be educated by you about the body of Christ and other stuff About our faith.Thank you so very much. May God grant you many years.
My friend told me once: "What is a heresy? It's just a disagreement with the Dogma." I laughed, because I knew that it's more than that and, since then, started to think about that topic. It is a more interesting theme than I thought it was.
Thessalonians 2 10 And in all the deceit of injustice among those who were dispossessed, because they did not receive the love of the truth to save them;11 And for this reason may God send them the energy of error in that you believe them in a lie,12 That all may be judged who did not believe the truth, but rejoiced in unrighteousness13 And we ought to thank God always for you, brothers beloved by the Lord, because God chose you from the beginning for salvation in the sanctification of the Spirit and the faith of truth,14 to which he called you through our gospel for the care of the glory of our Lord Jesus Christ.15 Therefore, brothers, stand up and keep the traditions that you were taught either by word or by our letter.
@@acekoala457 That's from the 20's, things were unbelievably better back then, recently we had the Archbishop wishing Muslim "brothers" a happy Ramadan, also they have been falsely baptising people, and have made women and others in serious error not just priests but bishops. And selling churches to be transformed into mosques, and condemning the faithful for their faith, and covering up scandal, and much much besides. The whole thing makes me lament, they are endangering the souls of those under them without the least bit of care. Ah and they are going to give one billion pounds to blacks. While at the same time condemning the African Anglicans for being Christian.
@vorynrosethorn903 I am always shocked to hear christians say that we worship the same God as muslims.. in my mind I'm thinking "wow you don't need to dig to deep before you find nothing but polemics on our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ"
@@Taydutt13 These people aren't Christian, they are liberals (as in the philosophy/ideology) who are associating themselves with the Church for cultural or spiritual reasons, with laymen ignorance is an excuse due to the lacking education within many of these dominations, and the misguided leadership. For those in Holy Orders there is no such excuse, they have put their own God's or weaknesses before their faith in the Father and duty to the Church.
@@vorynrosethorn903 Many of the same Problems existed in the 1920s as to now. Rampant Ecumenism, Liturgical Disunity, Pet Theologies. The point is that the letter could still speak to Anglicans now as well as it did in the 1920s.
Jesus was killed for heresy, and christians follow his example by advocating heresy and getting killed for it, usually by some brutal method akin to the cross like burning at the stake.
When you look 👀 at the Orthodox Church ⛪️ you only see the authenticity of the ancient church. With all the traditions and languages it is traced back to how the church would have been, with all love and respect to Roman Christian’s I pray you come back to the original apostolic Catholic faith😢
@@YourBoyJohnny94 So you're saying the 1 + million Armenians, 20.000 + Soviets, 300.000 + Greeks and the Assyrian - to name a few - who were killed, just should have spread the Gospel instead of getting killed? Not to forget all the other groups that had their priests and bishops imprisoned. Brother, I know it's difficult for us privileged people to relate to these events of the past but I'd still appreciate you to be more kind and understanding when it comes to this.
Great video Father! Would you like to make a video about Matthew 24? A lot of atheist online are using that chapter in such bad ways I think it would be really good to clear things out (when it is talking about the end of times or about the siege of Jerusalim 70 A.D and so on)
St. Theodore the Studite (9th C.): “Regarding the Faith, the heretics were utterly shipwrecked; but concerning the others, even if in their thinking they did not founder, nevertheless, on account of their communion with heresy, they too were destroyed alongside the others.” (Epistles, Bk. 2, “Epistle 15, To the Patriarch of Jerusalem,” PG 99:1164AB)
The fact that iconoclasm persisted for 150 years makes one think about the people that lived during that time: multiple generations were born, baptized, lived, and died during that period and would have been taught and simply assumed that iconoclasm was the tradition of the church and not heresy. Hindsight is 20/20.
Because the iconodule confusion isevident. Its clearly a later practice that they justified. Saying things like "Luke painted the first icon." When there is zero proof because they want to justify themselves. Because scripture makes zero mention of the practice in anyway. Because early christian writings give no instructions on it whatsoever. Not even mentioning it in passing. And when they do mention it they exclusively speak negatively of the practice amongst pagans. Aristides, Irenaeus, Hippolytus, Lactantius, Justin Martyr, Origen all speak against it. And, Origen even states explicitly that honor given to an image cannot pass to the one represented. It's hard to agree with Nicea 2 that this was a universal Christian practice then since NONE of them seem interested in it. Yet, somehow it has become absolutely pivotal to the Orthodox faith. @JunkyJeeMail
The church had a norm of icon veneration. Doesn't make it patristic. I'm not sure about your point regarding whether it was about breaking or simply not venerating,. But, as a sidenote early muslims were also not absolutely against images. That was a later reaction to Orthodox piety. Regardless, the church had no basis for such norms. And were forced to justify it. But, no it absolutely does not reflect an Islamic worldview on my part. Thats just an assertion even though my worldview is fundamentally opposed to a Muslim worldview. Its not that matter can't or hasn't been sanctified by the Incarnation. Its that this in no way logically leads one to icon veneration. neither do the scriptures or the early fathers. Thats my point. Do you disagree that the fathers were not venerating icons? @JunkyJeeMail
Right. Icons didn't appear in the 7th century. They also weren't common place in the 1st, 2nd, or 3rd based on all the available evidence. Why is that not a problem in your eyes? Why is the fabrication of history like that of "luke venerating icons" not concerning to you. And no, the mere presence of images is not the same thing as icon veneration so finding a rudimentary picture of Jesus in a catacomb somewhere is not good evidence for your position. The convenience of your position is that in the end one merely appeals to the authority of the church on any issue. And dismisses the paucity of scriptural support. And then pretends that I am dismissing the implications of the incarnation; but I am not. The honor conferred to an image does not transfer to the one displayed in the image. This isn't merely my opinion but that of the early church fathers. @JunkyJeeMail
@@micahwatz1148 To those saying ecumenism isn’t the greatest heresy, it is obvious you don’t understand what you’re saying no to. Ecumenism is the means by which the filioque, Arianism, Nestorianism, Monophysitism etc, would be allowed to contaminate the Church. It is the greatest threat.
I have a lot of respect for Father Josiah and enjoy much of this content, as we share many of the same values, but I think the issue I have is that if Orthodoxy is the one and only means of salvation, why hasn't the EOC done more in the way of evangelism. To your churches credit, many of them recognize this shortcoming but it still begs the question. As with most Americans, I come from a long line of devout Protestants, many of whom spreading the Gospel is central to the faith. So for a church to make the claim as the one and only, and have such a relatively small history/impact of outreach compared to Protestants and Catholics. Well, the disconnect is obvious. Also, if you truly believe, this, I would recommend a push to get your people to invite others to an EOC service...outside of their own ethnic communities. Something you'll never see lacking in the Protestant/Evangelical side of the fence. The message I get from looking at this as well as other EOC content is more of a "come and find us but don't expect an invitation and the onus is all on you" no matter the distance or lack of ethic diversity (apparently this is an issue with many congregations and the welcome is not always a warm one - again, getting this from the honest feedback of some of your fellow EOC content providers). Let me end this by saying, there's a great deal I admire about your faith. There is an obvious beauty and historicity to it. And I don't doubt it has produced many great heroes of the Christian faith. But this question has always bothered me when I hear claims such as the one made here. Blessings.
I suggest you go to ubi petrus youtube channel. He is doing a while video on this that completely discredits this false assertion. Some orthodox will acknowledge this out of their own ignorance on the topic. The orthodox church was one with the catholic for 1000 years. So all the evangelism that was done in the first millennium was by us. Then we were dealing with Islam, and communism but despite this, the true faith and evangelism made its way to the likes of Alaska, where actually the indigenous people who converted write that the western catholics and their evangelization was absolutely terrible, and brutal. We hear of mass Graves near orphanages. whereas the orthodox evangelize the *correct way* and made many disciples. There are orthodox churches in Alaska, Africa, Japan, China and to this day many missionary work being done. However, even considering protestant and catholic missionary work as such is disingenuous as the apostles never stood and told people to say one prayer or "accept Jesus as savior" and then made them part of the church. It was a much longer process. It took discipleship for over a year to make sure the person was sure why they were converting. This is also in the great commission to make them disciples first *then* baptize them. Lastly, your false idea of what evangelism looks like or what you think should have happened in 2000 years which is nothing but 2 days to God is what is wrong. As of today, we are seeing mass conversions to our churches in the last 5 years. So evangelism is still happening to this day and our saints prophesied this and said that there will be a period where God will draw so many to the church. I think the video I suggested will help as he has many sources in it. God bless.
I was raised Protestant but detached from Protestantism years ago, having never been a fan of the Reformers. Although I was baptized into the Lutheran Church as a child, today I embrace Orthodox theology. I believe your question concerns both doctrinal purity and a bit of eschatology, but first I need to offer a bit of context. On several occasions I have heard both Orthodox and Roman Catholic priests referring to the Church as the _Vine_ in an attempt to cultivate love for the Church. While this seems innocent at first glance, as a student of the bible, I could not help but be reminded of the words of Jesus in John's Gospel: "I am the vine, ye are the branches: He that abideth in me, and I in him, the same bringeth forth much fruit: for without me ye can do nothing." (John 15:5) The Church, of course, is _not_ the vine but rather the Lord's body, meaning his branches -- both individually and in aggregate. I view any reference to the Church as the vine to be a challenge to the headship of Christ and thus to his infallibility. I later learned that the RCC holds the doctrine of Church Infallibility, meaning its traditions and also its Magisterium are not to be challenged. While the Orthodoxy lacks this degree of formalization, it holds a similar perspective. I believe that the Lord's letters to the 7 churches in Revelation are an answer to all of this, as he addresses both doctrinal impurity and also the fragmentation of Christendom itself. That is apparent in the fact that there are 7 churches and that each body of believers is separately rebuked. It cannot be the case that the Church is without developed traditions or doctrine that may at times be contrary to the words of Jesus, as these letters of correction divinely reveal. Consequently, when the Church of Sardis (as one example) claims to be the _one, true Church,_ or declares that the Church of Laoedicea or Ephesus or Smyrna are outside the faith, these claims are at odds with the words of Jesus that _He alone_ is the vine from which his branches receive life.
Orthodoxy has been under constant persecution for 2,000 years. The Roman Catholic institution blocked the Orthodox Church from the West until fairly recently. There's missions in many places now. It isn't the Gospel being spread if the theology has errors.
@@PETERJOHN101All of those churches were in the one overall Church. They weren't separate bodies like Protestantism. We still have some of those churches left in the Orthodox Church. It would be like Constantinople claiming to be the one true Church by itself over the other 13 churches in the one Church.
Heresy is difficult to define or pin down, but this much can be said with confidence: Pretty much EVERTHING that passes for Christianity today is Heresy,
Father Josiah's homilies are case studies in the superiority of Christianity. Christianity challenges each person to adopt a higher way of living. Christianity confronts the world and announces the sins of the world, boldly, but without violence and criminality. Christianity announces the sins of each person and demands that they admit those sins and apologize for those sins and commit themselves to a different way of living in the name of Christ, who Christians believe was God among us. There is nothing else like this on Earth, and it seeks something wholly different from all other belief systems and in a totally different way.
Hello Father, and thank you for this overview. My difficulty is in the fact that while I now embrace Orthodox theology, the EOC considers me Prelest due to a vision of Christ I experienced in 2010. I later wrote a book about my experience and now teach prophecy from the Bible online. While I am no longer Protestant and would like to join the EOC, I cannot because I am considered Prelest. Do you (or anyone) have any thoughts on my situation that you might want to share? God bless.
Yes brother, you are in a 'spiritual delusion', elder Cleopa Ilie was saying "It is much more usefull for you to see your own sins than to see angels!". I recommend you to do a self-diagnose by reading the writing of russian: St. Tikhon of Zadonsk, St Ignatiis Brianchaninov and "On aquisition of the Holy Spirit" by St Seraphim of Sarov. Read this lectures and get back with an answer. May GOD help you to become enlighten!
I’m a very picky eater and only eat meat. I work a laborious job and am a catechumen. I’m struggling with the idea of lent I want to participate but I’m worried if I give up meat and dive into fasting I’ll be in trouble.
Ask your priest, he doesn't want you to hurt yourself or set yourself up for failure. There's economia, remember! Mine doesn't even expect catechumens to fast, so always check with him for these things, don't just go it alone.
Talk to your priest. I’m also carnivore for mental health reasons and my priest said I can just eat fish and sea food during lent, and fast days. It’s very hard but it’s doable
Hello, brother! Those who work a hard/physical job are released from fasting. Find some good priest to whom you can open your heart and talk to him about this. I am sure he will say you the same. Keep going, you are on the right way, brother, I assure you! God be with you and you with God! Best regards from orthodox Serbia and Macedonia!
Father, Im not Christian but I appreciate your work. However, adding a bit more context for those of us who didnt grow up with Christianity would greatly increase our (my) understanding. Thank you again!
It appears that this priest doesn't respond personally to questions in these comment sections but I'd like to hear more about the church fathers teaching regarding "protestant heresies" mentioned at 7:06 Protestantism being a much later development. Perhaps there were "faith alone" teachers in the patricistic period?
@patristicnectarfilms can you make a video about the 1991 agreement where the Antiochian Synod went into communion with the monophysites. Some Antiochian priests are adamant that they are in communion with the monophysites. Some are not. I was personally extremely heart broken when I found out about this.
Come and see. Find a Church and participate. Participation is everything. As for books that explain the faith, you might try the Bible (sorry for the hint of sarcasm.) Start with the Gospel. I like St. Matthew then St. John to fill in the gaps and expand on things the synoptic Gospels leave out. I know the Bible can be difficult to understand. Father Stephen de Young has a great Bible study podcast called The Whole Counsel of God that has helped me greatly. Above all, seek to know God and He will reveal himself to you. As you come to know Him, things become more clear. Pray to Him. Speak to Him humbly, acknowledging that you are not the master here. This is what it means to "knock and the way will be opened unto you." Ask for wisdom and understanding, love and guidance. He will make himself known. God bless you.
Orthodox do not believe in salvation here and now. It is life long process that is decided by the God once we depart from this world and our soul is brought up before the God. Proper question could have been - how do the Orthodox prepare themselves for that glorious event.? Lord commandment is - Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father who is in heaven is perfect (Matt 5, 48). How do we perfect ourselves.? Personal asceticism... by praying, fasting, confessing, communing, attending services, controlling our thoughts, reading Bible and other spiritual books, visiting monasteries, etc.
I understand what you’re saying, but I’m honestly confused as to why you single out Luther. Chemnitz, Luther, Melanchthon, and other reformers had even attempted to reunite with the East. Lutherans are only called that because after 100 years of being called Lutherans as a pejorative term the name stuck. Confessional Lutheranism is way closer to Orthodoxy than Roman Catholicism. As someone who grew up Presbyterian as well I have been open to becoming Orthodox, but am becoming an LCMS Lutheran. I genuinely don’t understand why there is such antipathy towards a tradition which reintroduced Eastern Fathers into the conversation in the West. I completely understand that part of the orthodox perspective is that the visible church is an important boundary between us theologically, but I really don’t understand why people are treated like half brothers in Christ instead of full brothers. Shouldn’t it be based upon our love for God and for one another? There really is very little that I can’t fully assent to about Orthodoxy. I just don’t think the attitude of anathematizing people who I know for a fact Christ has transformed. I don’t think that’s a crazy position to take.
There’s a huge difference between the first generation of Reformers who genuinely had the goal of reforming the Catholic Church and the “reformed” like Calvin and Zwingli who were trying to innovate. It’s like there’s a bond between Catholics and Orthodox Christians over their differences with “Protestants.” Realistically though I don’t know what anyone would expect from Luther or others in the situation they were in.
Our family in Christ are those we are in communion with because they are in the Body of Christ. This is how it's always been since the first century. It's not to be rude or anything but just a reality. They're not anathematized, they're just not part of the Church.
”And John answered and said, Master, we saw one casting out devils in thy name; and we forbad him, because he followeth not with us. And Jesus said unto him, Forbid him not: for he that is not against us is for us.“ Luke 9:49-50
Father Josiah: the Church from the beginning has disagreed on some theological matters. As long as our belief does not go outside the established Creed (ie, the Niceene Creed), it becomes a difference of opinion and not a heresy!
So Luther was 100% right at the time, tried to reform the Catholic church, yet excommunicated by sticking to the Bible, and he is the heresy? What Luther should've done in your opinion, after all that he tried? What would you have sone if you were in his shoes?
Thank you father for your reflection, I’m not sure if you take questions here, I am really torn at what entails heresy, the confusion comes because I thought the following is heresy but seeing that our church is allowing it because of economy, not sure what to believe. Here in Australia, some of our Antiochian orthodox churches are communing the Maronites (this is a RC sect under the see of Rome) who are married or linked by marriage to our Orthodox brethren. If our leaders are allowing this, then is it not heresy? Yet communion with schismatic churches is known to be heretic because it’s outside of communion in truth. lol please help!
Father, can you do a commentary on the break away group called the TOC (True Orthodox) that split from ROCOR about 15 years ago when unification with Moscow Patriach occurred. Half my family follow this breakaway church and have disowned me and it's caused me so much pain and grief. They accuse me of being a heretic but we beleive them to be the misguided ones. We still love them but they show only anger or silence in return. I go to ROCOR and SOC churches as my husband is Serbian Orthodox. They have intense hatred for my choice to stay with ROCOR and my husband. I can't understand the issued and why they think I'm damned to hell for staying with the main Orthodox church. It's so painful. I feel that their actions which lack any Christian love is not beneficial even if they believe themselves to be in the correct church. I'm so confused what to do. I can't leave my church to join them - I don't believe they are correct. Please explain more... I know many families in Australia like mine that still suffer abandonment from their relatives and it's very very distressing. Are we all Orthodox or is the TOC now considered heretics?
You are in THE CHURCH, thank God! The TOC and GOC are just as you call it, break away sects. They are not part of THE CHURCH. I’m sure Father Josiah can elaborate. In the meantime, listen on UA-cam to Orthodox Talks with Fr. Kosmas “zeal without knowledge”. It will help you with this subject.
I can’t see my previous comment, but the the video on UA-cam by Orthodox talks is called, “zeal that comes from pride”. It will help you with this topic. You are part of THE CHURCH, thank God! The TOC and GOC are not part of THE CHURCH. Hopefully, Fr. Josiah can make a video about this topic.
Orthodox Talks with Fr. Kosmas has a video on this topic called zeal that comes from pride. It will help you with the topic. You are in the church, stay there. The TOC and GOC are not part of the Church. Pray for your family to come back to the church.
How is it you would describe the status of salvation for people who live being deceived under heresies such as Calvinism, Charismatics, etc? Even though they worship God through a corrupted faith, it seems that God still works through them even if they fully do not understand. For we shall know them by their fruits, for God calls us to believe in Him and Jesus's sacrifice, to be baptized, and to live and be in Christ. Lest, Orthodoxy would claim to the same aberrations of Calvinism, that some were predestined to Hell--those who were never exposed to Orthodoxy.
Can you judge people for accepting what they have received? Many in America, especially rural America, have never been exposed to Orthodoxy. In rural America there are fewer immigrants from Orthodox countries and so there is no established Orthodox Church in these areas. Personally, I would never have known about the Church without the internet and I have to drive an hour and a half to get to one. It's worth it to me, but most people I talk to think I'm crazy. Protestants I talk to try to talk me into going to a closer church, but they don't understand my reasoning. Anyway, those who have not been exposed to true Christianity and still love God are doing the best they can with what they have received. God is no more bound to the Church than He was to the Temple. Just as when He came in the flesh, those who love the Living God will know Him and allow Him to work through them. God will judge us based on what we did with what we received. We who have received the fullness of the faith have a responsibility to produce fruit accordingly. War is terrible, but the war in Ukraine may bring more immigrants from Orthodox countries and will perhaps seed more churches in the West. "What man meant for evil, God turned to good."
@@troyhavok8605I think your argument could also be used to support pluralism and universalism. But Scripture does not support your position: it makes many highly exclusivistic claims, especially from Jesus Himself. We cannot love Someone we do not know.
@@troyhavok8605 We do not judge anyone outside the church. That is up to God. What we do know is salvation is normative through the church which the literal body of Christ, and there is only one body. At the same time, God can of course save anyone outside the church He pleases by joining them in a way unknown to us, to His body, His church. We believe in His endless mercy of course and we also believe that everyone will be judged according to what they knew. If they knowingly rejected orthodoxy, that is different than someone that's never heard of it but tries to love God with all their heart and live according to his commandments. This however shouldn't mean we shouldn't want to live out our orthodoxy for our own salvation but also so that people around us come to orthodoxy as well. We should desire that every person comes to the full Truth in this life. God's general grace does work everywhere and will meet us where we're at in life, even despite our errors, but God's goal is always to draw us closer to the church and the true FULL faith. If we are humble, then this will happen , as it has to million of protestants converting to orthodoxy. If we're prideful, then we will resist orthodoxy.
@thewiseandthefoolish Who called him brother? lol Brother doesn't necessarily mean a brother in Christ, it can be a term of endearment for we are brothers in humanity. But no he isn't in the church and therefore he isn't a brother in Christ in the full sense of the term.
As soon as Christ ascended and the Holy Apostles were taken from us, it was only a matter of time before things began to go in different directions. Indeed, even in the days of the Apostles, things were already splintering. Trinitarians are following their conscience, according to the light each is given. What is the line between perfect orthodox belief and heresy is often either a matter of one's faith, with scant evidence to back the assertions. No one can know another's motives. Only Christ sits upon the Bema seat. So we can go on casting anathemas around or we can be a bit more charitable to one another in conversation and prayer. We ought to at least consider our Lord's admonition in the Gospel of Mark regarding the man casting out demons in Jesus' name. We may look at others that they are not "with us", but they are not against you; they are also "for YHWH".
Thank you. Is it possible to be orthodox in terms of belief and practice, while also being part of a Protestant/evangelical church? There are people who are Christ-like in how they treat others, loving people in a way that reflects Jesus. Maybe they don’t have the title “Orthodox” with a capital O, but in practice they live the true faith. I know people who are capital O Orthodox, yet come off as cold towards others and indifferent to the suffering. I myself belong to multiple church communities, both Orthodox and evangelical. While my theological leanings are generally towards what would be considered orthodoxy, I’m also connected to evangelicals who share 99.9% of the same beliefs of Jesus. That .1% of difference is on debatable issues (roles for women in the church, holy days) We’re all still learning together to better know and understand Jesus and reflect Him to the world around us.
Jesus said those that trust in him and obey His word will be saved. The doers not merely the hearers. I think that means anybody who does that, EO Catholics or protestant
I think it's easier to follow sound doctrine than consider all the heresies. Saint John of Damascus lists 103 heresies giving some of them alternative names which they are also known. This was more than 1000 years before nihilism which sounds a bit like the first one "barbarism". Barbarism was a heresy where man would live by his own will alone. Nihilism denies God's existence therefore leaving man to only his own will. IMHO
Heresy is any belief or theory that strongly opposes established beliefs or customs, particularly the accepted beliefs or religious law of a religious organization. Within Christianity, it is any belief or practice that explicitly undermines the gospel. It is a threat to the unity and orthodoxy of the faith, and historically, the identification and condemnation of heresies have played a significant role in shaping the development of Christian theology. Learn the Greek definition of heresy, biblical and historical examples, and the difference between heresy and blasphemy. According to Easton's Bible Dictionary, the word heresy comes from a Greek word, meaning a self-chosen opinion or the sect holding that opinion. Heresies came to be understood as self-chosen doctrines that do not originate from God.
Wouldn't heresy be anything that God and Jesus did not support, such as saved by grace/faith without works and without obedience to God's commandments, praying to statues, praying to anyone other than God, and claiming transubstantiation?
@@thebugman8696 The problem with that is, those who deny that we are justified by faith preach nothing but the law, nullifying the gospel of grace. But I suppose eastern spiritualist mystics playing under the guise of Christianity have no concept of human sin, and being justified, that is, to be declared righteous by the merits of Christ imputed to us through faith, don't really care about the gospel of grace.
@@guyontheinternet8891 So it sounds like faith merits salvation, is that correct? Also, who gets to determine who Christ is. If I have faith in a Christ but I believe Christ to be a created creature of God subject to God's will, am I still a Christian?
@@guyontheinternet8891Amen. Well said. If I’m a heretic for believing in the biblical doctrine of justification and the double imputation of Jesus Christ, then I guess I’ll be a heretic! Outside of the scriptures we have no other writings that are breathed out by God, so by default the scripture is the highest authority for man. So everything that men say is subject to the higher authority of scripture. Scripture alone is the sole, INFALLIBLE rule of faith. And please spare me the church gave us the Bible rant. James White has destroyed that argument in many of his debates on sola Scriptura. Jesus himself placed scripture as the highest authority in Mark chapter 7.
I respect your content Father. Do you truly believe that people who dutifully attempt to dedicate their life to Christ but who come to a different logical conclusion on dogmatic interpretation are “not saved”? This would seem antithetical to Christ’s teachings that intent of the heart to do right and follow God are primary to any designation or claimed sect.
Yes, and the condescending attitude is a definite turn off to fellow Christians who are not Orthodox. Maybe the early church father, who first initiated the use of icons and said to “venerate” them was misguided and unintentional heretical. Humans are not infallible so unless it is the word of God, we cannot be sure. When I visited an Orthodox Church in Jordan, the parishioners were bowing down before the icons and kissing them (covered with glass). As an outsider, this looks like worshipping to me!!!
“Lutheranism” and “Calvinism” were pejoratives applied by the Church of Rome when it was resisting being reformed of its own heresies. Lutherans called themselves Evangelicals and Calvinists called themselves Reformed, and both saw their own beliefs as catholic and orthodox.
every heretic thinks that. mormons and jehovas witnesses both think they revived the ancient church. What calvin and luther taught is not what the 1st millennium church taught their views spring from medieval nominalism. This is solidly demonstrated through Church history. Their innovations are just another aberration in reaction to rome's aberrations. next you'll tell me that the Democratic People's Republic of Korea is a "democratic" "people's" "republic"
These are grumblers, complainers, walking according to their own lusts; and they mouth great swelling words, flattering people to gain advantage. But you, beloved, remember the words which were spoken before by the apostles of our Lord Jesus Christ: how they told you there would be mockers in the last time who would walk according to their own ungodly lusts. Jude 16-18
You quote pope benedict and yet say protestants have no connection to orthodoxy. The church in germany followed luther, the church in england followed cramer and others. The RCC and OCC love to say that protestants have no connection with catholicism. But we came out of Rome. And classical protestants looked to the fathers and scripture to reform the errors that were in Rome. So to say we have no connection is a play on words. We, as classical protestsnts, hold to catholicity. Other than that, love your work.
I was brought up having nuns and brothers almost spit when they used the word heretic, later in life I looked up it's meaning, a person of free thought, not constained by dogma, I've been a proud heretic since that day.
Interesting. Your description of heresy seemed to describe the traceable developments within Eastern Orthodoxy itself. So, yes, reductionism can be a problem - but far less so than syncretism. After all, the Prophets were very often reductionistic compared to the idolatrous priestly cult. And while the faith has always been purely given it has never so remained for long. But to create an illusion that it remains is to do what the Pharisees did before Christ and especially medieval Christians did later. Imagining that their innovations always existed, they proposed an authoritative oral tradition that just somehow never made it into Scripture. They had to. The contrasts were so clear. Thus, when Jesus came, no pure Church could be found. Nevertheless, He built it and hell did not prevail. Yet, just as we read about beginning to happen even in the apostolic age, there wouldn't be the next time either. Until then, here's the bottom line: Catholics and Eastern Os preach the Church as Gospel, which is already a form of idolatry. Oral tradition is used to justify their many novelties. Whereas, Protestants preach Christ as the Gospel. And they seek faithful via Scripture in terms of doctrine. Nothing could be more apostolic than that. So, we find Clement of Alexandria (d. ca. 216) saying, “But those who are ready to toil in the most excellent pursuits, will not desist from the search after truth, till they get the information from the Scriptures themselves” (Stromata 7:16). Hippolytus of Rome (d. 235) affirmed his belief in the Scriptures, saying, “There is, brethren, one God, the knowledge of whom we gain from the Holy Scriptures and no other source” (Against the Heresy of One Noetus 9). In AD 370, Bishop Basil of Caesarea wrote, “Therefore let God-inspired Scripture decide between us; and on which side be found doctrines in harmony with the word of God, in favour of that side will be cast the vote of truth” (Letter 189:3). Ambrose (340?-396), “How can we use those things which we do not find in the Holy Scriptures?” (Ambr. Offic., 1:23). Athanasius (300?-375), “The Holy Scriptures, given by inspiration of God, are of themselves sufficient toward the discovery of truth. (Orat. adv. Gent., ad cap.) “The holy Scripture is of all things most sufficient for us” (To the Bishops of Egypt 1:4)." "The Catholic Christians will neither speak nor endure to hear anything in religion that is a stranger to Scripture; it being an evil heart of immodesty to speak those things which are not written,” (Athanasius, Exhort. ad Monachas). “Vainly then do they run about with the pretext that they have demanded Councils for the faith’s sake; for divine Scripture is sufficient above all things; but if a Council be needed on the point, there are the proceedings of the Fathers, for the Nicene Bishops did not neglect this matter, but stated the doctrine so exactly, that persons reading their words honestly, cannot but be reminded by them of the religion towards Christ announced in divine Scripture.” (Athanasius, De Synodis, 6). We ought not to deliver even the most casual remark without the Holy Scriptures: nor be drawn aside by mere probabilities and the artifices of argument. Do not then believe me because I tell thee these things, unless thou receive from the Holy Scriptures the proof of what is set forth: for this salvation, which is of our faith, is not by ingenious reasonings, but by proof from the Holy Scriptures...Let us then speak nothing concerning the Holy Ghost but what is written; and if anything be not written, let us not busy ourselves about it. The Holy Ghost Himself spoke the Scriptures; He has also spoken concerning Himself as much as He pleased, or as much as we could receive. Be those things therefore spoken, which He has said; for whatsoever He has not said, we dare not say. (Cyril of Jerusalem, Catechetical Lectures, 4.17ff) What then is our reply? We do not think that it is right to make their prevailing custom the law and rule of sound doctrine. For if custom is to avail for proof of soundness, we too, surely, may advance our prevailing custom; and if they reject this, we are surely not bound to follow theirs. Let the inspired Scripture, then, be our umpire, and the vote of truth will surely be given to those whose dogmas are found to agree with the Divine words. (Gregory of Nyssa, Dogmatic Treatises, Book 12. On the Trinity, To Eustathius.) Let us not therefore carry about the notions of the many, but examine into the facts. For how is it not absurd that in respect to money, indeed, we do not trust to others, but refer this to figures and calculation; but in calculating upon facts we are lightly drawn aside by the notions of others; and that too, though we possess an exact balance, and square and rule for all things, the declaration of the divine laws? Wherefore I exhort and entreat you all, disregard what this man and that man thinks about these things, and inquire from the Scriptures all these things; and having learnt what are the true riches, let us pursue after them that we may obtain also the eternal good things; which may we all obtain, through the grace and love towards men of our Lord Jesus Christ, with Whom, to the Father and the Holy Spirit, be glory, might, and honor, now and ever, and world without end. Amen.” (John Chrysostom, Homily on 2 Corinthians, 13.4) For the reasonings of any men whatsoever, even though they be [true Christians], and of high reputation, are not to be treated by us in the same way as the canonical Scriptures are treated. We are at liberty, without doing any violence to the respect which these men deserve, to condemn and reject anything in their writings, if perchance we shall find that they have entertained opinions differing from that which others or we ourselves have, by the divine help, discovered to be the truth. I deal thus with the writings of others, and I wish my intelligent readers to deal thus with mine. (St Augustine, Letters, 148.15)
Habakkuk 3:9 Thy bow was made quite naked (bare), according to the oaths of the tribes (oaths were sworn over your arrows), even thy word. Selah. Thou didst cleave (divided) the earth with rivers. 💘
The Orthodox Church or churches accepted the Filioque for use by the Western Church, as a response to heresy denying the divinity of the Holy Spirit in the seventh and eighth centuries. Sometimes it was an issue, sometimes it wasn't. Yet, one cannot read the farewell dialogs in John 15 and 16 without recognizing that it is a valid understanding, especially when the Catholic Church has acknowledged that the source of the Holy Spirit is the Father and procession, when it comes to Christ, does not mean as the source, but it would accept the understanding of proceeds through the Son. When Jesus breathed on the disciples and said, “receive the Holy Spirit" seems like a slam dunk to me. Now could it have been handled differently? Yes, that's a different argument. In fact, at the time of the schism in 1054 no one on either side thought it would be permanent. There was great cooperation during the initial crusades and the continued schism was political more than religious. Attempts at reunification happened and even when agreed to by the bishops of the entire eastern church ended up being negated by one Eastern bishop. If the pope had done that you would claim invalid primacy, yet if a single bishop does that in the east it's okay? Similarly, the Orthodox constantly claim heresy when the Western Church defines anything. Purgatory is a heresy. Yet the Orthodox Church maintains that there is a place or state of purification where the soul will benefit from prayer. Original sin the way Catholics explain it is heresy to them. The Orthodox maintain that original sin brought death and separated man from God. Catholics of course would not disagree. Simply a different understanding based upon culture but with the same result. Now, if the Catholic Church had stated that Jesus was the source of the Trinity or abrogated the order of the Trinity, that would be a different story. If the Catholic Church denied the divinity of any members of the Holy Trinity, denied baptism, denied holy orders, denied the requirement of faith and works for Salvation, or denied any number of dogmatic principles that are agreed upon by the East and the West then I would understand. The Orthodox will resort to “it's a mystery” When they want to refute a Catholic definition. But the Orthodox argue about terminology, or the attempt to use a word to define something. For instance, the Orthodox believe that the bread and wine are transformed into the body and blood of Jesus. The Catholics believe the same. Yet, add the word transubstantiation and the Orthodox cry heresy. It is simply a word that the West used to define a transformation that was taking place. Such is the difference I guess between the East and the West culturally. But it is not a cause for schism. Especially not when considered in the light of the paragraphs below. I would like to reference the Jerusalem Synod of the Orthodox Church of 1672, called because the ecumenical patriarch was in heresy and had become a Protestant. The beliefs as stated are identical to those of the Catholic Church. In terms of the Eucharist: "Further, that in every part, or the smallest division of the transmuted bread and wine there is not a part of the Body and Blood of the Lord - for to say so were blasphemous and wicked - but the entire whole Lord Christ substantially, that is, with His Soul and Divinity, or perfect God and perfect man. This is just an example., transmuted, not transubstantiated, so one is okay and the other is Heresy. But wait, it gets better. A little later in the paragraph it reads: "the bread of the Prothesis* set forth in all the several Churches, being changed and transubstantiated, becomes, and is, after consecration, one and the same with That in the Heavens." Oh my goodness, the word transubstantiated. The difference in the word is only a difference in the tense. So how is it now a heresy if the Orthodox church never changes its teaching? Now let's get to that pesky purgatory. That same council said the following: "And the souls of those involved in mortal sins, who have not departed in despair but while still living in the body, though without bringing forth any fruits of repentance, have repented - by pouring forth tears, by kneeling while watching in prayers, by afflicting themselves, by relieving the poor, and finally by showing forth by their works their love towards God and their neighbor, and which the Catholic Church has from the beginning rightly called satisfaction - [their souls] depart into Hades, and there endure the punishment due to the sins they have committed. But they are aware of their future release from there, and are delivered by the Supreme Goodness, through the prayers of the Priests, and the good works which the relatives of each do for their Departed" Ok, so they don't call it purgatory. And a descripcion of exactly what the Catholic Church teaches is called heresy because it is called purgatory. The fact is the hypocrisy of the Orthodox Church is glaring. Now, you are concerned about heresy regarding the above issues, which I have shown are really non-issues. Let's look at another issue. I believe you at some point in this video or another discuss Hesychasm. Let's look at the writings of St Gregory Palamus, who claimed the Cappadocian Fathers agreed with him but there is no evidence of this. We are not talking about the procession of the Holy Spirit here. We are talking about the very nature of God. He separates God's Essence from his Energies in a way that goes against the Council of Nicaea. Against opposition he also describes the Essence of God lying above and a divinity or Godhead that is lower. If this is not absolute heresy I don't know what is. He also stated that those who have obtained spiritual and supernatural grace have become entirely God. He went so far as to say that those who attain it become uncreated. This even caused the chief opponent of his, who wrote against papal primacy, to convert to Roman Catholicism and become a Catholic Bishop. Yet despite this obvious heresy the Roman church has not condemned Orthodoxy for it. Why? Because despite differences in understanding these are teachings which although heterodox will not affect the salvation of the souls of the faithful. Neither will the filioque. And that is a lot more in keeping with traditional Catholic Orthodox thought than St Gregory. But where are the Orthodox now? There is a schism between the Russian Orthodox Church and the Ecumenical Patriarch of Constantinople. You have no head. Therefore you have no church, you have churches. There is not an organization that has ever been conceived that does not have a head. While Christ is the head of the church he established a temporal head of the church for the purpose of preventing such problems. There is no power within the temporal church in Orthodoxy to call a council, to resolve the dispute between the ecumenical patriarch and the Russian Orthodox Patriarch, and it seems to be more like fighting children than a church. Yes we do have problems in the Catholic Church. Pope Francis is not my favorite pope, I will tell you that. I do agree that there have been a lot of abuses in the church since Vatican II, not as a result directly of Vatican II, but mainly because of the social context in the West in which it occurred. But The Pope has the power to put the German bishops in their place and to keep the church united in a much more effective manner than the Orthodox Church has been able to. The much anticipated Pan- Orthodox Council of 2016 amounted to a lot of infighting and disagreement and really resulted in nothing, except for some Orthodox claiming that the ecumenical patriarch was trying to act like a pope. Furthermore the Russian Orthodox Patriarch has declared the Russian attack on Ukraine as a holy war. He has claimed sole jurisdiction in Ukraine. I don't see anything like this happening in the Catholic Church. There is plenty to criticize about the Orthodox Church or churches, and a true study shows that it has not maintained the faith exactly as promulgated in the Great councils. It has maintained the outward look of piety and orthodoxy but has as many problems as the Catholic Church. However, these criticisms do not make the Orthodox Church invalid. Your criticisms do not make the Catholic Church invalid either. God bless.
@@frankrosenbloom brother I don’t know if you‘ll read this after 4 months but after I read your reply on a comment under the video of fr. Josiah about the blessings of the pope, I in fact read all of your comments on this channel and want to thank you for being one of a few people who shares this kind of information. I was thinking also about converting to orthodoxy. You have to know that I am an Albanian catholic living in Germany and the situation here with the lgbtq community is outrageous I can tell you. It’s destroying my heart to see our beloved church do such things and I wish the pope would do something about it and because of that I was so frustrated and thought about converting to orthodoxy because they don’t have those kind of problems But after seeing documentary’s and articles on the problems of the Orthodox Church with its leaders and among the patriarchs themselves going so far that orthodox Christian’s for example are calling the patriarch of Constantinople a heretic is very problematic and it just points out the problems that you described in your comment. They drop the word „heretic“ like it is nothing and that is just sad. Also not to forget is that the priest and orthodox Christian’s are calling us heretics while their patriarchs are meeting with the RC church and visiting each other, they even hold church services as well as the eucharist together, you don’t do that with heretics. Also that the patriarch kyril of Russia is promising every fallen Russian soldier the forgiveness of his sins because it is a holy war and more examples are showing me that they have their own problems and much more division in their church then in our. Also is ecumenism for them also heresy (what a surprise) cause the body of Christ (the church) can not be divided and to call for union is saying that the body of Christ is divided are their saying.
@@unnukkamlek Sure did read it. Thanks for the reply. Yes, just as certain groups throw out labels to discredit others, such as "racist" or "Nazi", the Orthodox label every Catholic variation in language or understanding as from "heretics" and "devoid of grace" but at the same time interact favorably with Lutherans and other sects who have views far from their own. Yet, when have you heard Catholic bishops or the Pope call Orthodox heretics? Read the documents of the Orthodox Jerusalem Synod of 1672, called b to refute the heresy of Cyril of Constantinople, formerly Pariarch, who basically became a Calvinist. They argue for a state of purgation, and call the Eucharist the transubstantiated Host, yet now call the terms Purgatory and Transubstantiation, terms used to label a state or process, heresy. When you have little ammunition or proof, labeling others is an easy way of negating the need for logical discourse. The Catholic Church is willing to discuss and allow for cultural differences in understanding, while the Orthodox are not, and since they cannot offer cogent argument for their positions, calling names works better. After all, no one needs to defend not holding dialogue with racists, Nazis or heretics. Labeling people with whom you disagree horrible things does the job nicely. Also, remember that popes come and go. A poor pope is not proof of the Catholic Church being untrue, any more than a bad president is proof that the US is not a valid country. As well, a poor Patriarch does not disprove the validity of the Orthodox Church. However, Kiril, a man woth around $5 billion much due to illegal sale of contraband cigarettes, goes too far. No matter, his church is currently in schism with Constantinople and other EO churches. No head means no Church, but a conglomeration of churches headed in different directions. God Bless, brother.
Father Trenham, I was brought up in Presbyterianism as well, and eventually when I gained enough knowledge of who Calvin, Luther, and all of these people actually were, what they had done, their "version" of the faith, I just couldn't stay. Your channel has helped very much in the disconnection from this protestant Christianity, and this video in particular reminded me very much of my old church.. The words from the pastor of your Presbyterian church, once he heard of your interest in Orthodoxy "If only I was younger" was very hard to hear. Something in those words strikes right into the heart, knowing just how tenuous, what a responsibility it is to be a spiritual father for so many people in his parish, yet he knows it is a sinking ship Calvin had fabricated of the faith, no doubt. It's a shame that culture can lead them so far from the Orthodox faith, it had led me away for 10 long years, and though I acknowledge what heresies the church of Calvin had taught, I had been searching for the Orthodox perspective of the Bible the whole time.. It's a long road.
So you equivocate disobedience with the group with disobedience of Christ. Jesus came to the seven churches and said he had something against them. With your teaching the people in those churches would just have to obey the church, and therefore, error Christ. You support collective error. This is why The Catholic church is not the Bride of Christ, she's one of the virgins with the lamp. If you place your hope in her, your oil will run out. But you don't care about this, you just care about political union.
Martin Luther would never have wanted a denomination named after him whereas Calvin probably would have. Luther himself said he would prefer all his works to be destroyed except for his Catechism and his Bible translation into German. Luther probably would have led many people to Orthodoxy if he had lived longer. He was not a willful heretic wanting a following or a name for himself and rebelling against the Church. He should not be labelled a willful heretic and the "leader" of Protestant denominationalism. Many people who are protestant know nothing about Orthodoxy -- we should not call them names or put them all into one pot because many are indeed seeking God and want to live for Him, and He is bringing them to Orthodoxy. I will always be grateful for Martin Luther's help in my life and many older Protestant authors prior to becoming Orthodox. Many were very godly minded, even tho' they were not Orthodox -- I never followed modern authors while I knew nothing of Orthodoxy. I have observed, however, that many Orthodox to do not follow the sober ways taught in Orthodoxy; many are just as worldly and material minded as many unbelievers. People dress very casually in church, women often don't wear decent, modest clothes for church or head - coverings; many don't attend regularly or arrive on time, and their understanding of spiritual matters is shallow at best, yet they are considered "okay" because they are Orthodox. Isn't this a type of heresy? Heresy manifests itself in varying ways, doesn't it, not only in doctrine but also in practise?
Here's the obvious question: how do we know that the faith is actually preserved in catholic/orthodox church? I know Protestant Churches have their issues, but neither Catholic nor Orthodox churches are without their own. On the surface the icons of orthodoxy seem a lot like idols, on the surface the catholic reverence for saints seems a lot like saint worship, and we haven't even gotten to selling indulgences yet. The reformation was a reaction to the corruption of the catholic church. Was there impure motivations involved? Most certainly, we are sinful human beings after all. But the question still remains, how does an individual tell the difference between false and correct teachings? How do we know how to interpret these ancient texts that don't use language even remotely the same way we do? You make it sound so easy to avoid heresy, but it is far from it.
I am moving farther and farther from the Evangelical traditions and teachings as they just make very little Greek sense. I am reaching out as I want to belong to The Church of course of Christ but I Am a carful studier and have some questions of Orthodoxy. I know you have traditions that are even considered as holy. I would have little problem with them as long as they don't contradict scripture. I am not like a Calvinist as I know even the bible never calls itself 'undefileable' (probably not a word LoL). I see the salvation message in evangelicalism looking more and more ridiculous the more I study the holy scriptures. I have often told pastors and even bible scholars in my Pentecostal church that they handle salvation like if it were the canvas to a painting their so called 'Romans Road to salvation' is like using a paint roller and ruining the canvas, meaning its sloppy and uncareful. However I do favor Pelagius over 'saint' Augustine's teachings on the 'original sin'. I also don't understand how Orthodoxy still calls leaders 'father' even though Jesus said in Matthew 23:9, 'call no man father'. I sure hope context is not brought up as it seems if Jesus says "don't do X" to anything, context is irrelevant. I side with Orthodoxy on most everything else as I also have the same problems with the Roman Catholic issues that Orthodoxy does.
Matthew 23:9 Do not call anyone on earth your father; for One is your Father, He who is in heaven. One of the biggest heresy that occurred was during the Second Council of Nicaea in AD 787 when the Catholic church required the veneration of icons. Now the veneration of icons is not only a common practice; it is specifically taught by both Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox churches. Back when they were the same church and had not yet divided from each other, the Second Council of Nicaea mandated the veneration of icons (also called “iconodulia”). The Second Council of Nicaea (abbreviated as “Nicaea II”) took place in AD 787, decided that anyone who doesn’t venerate icons is to be anathema, or excommunicated from Christ’s church. Here’s what those bishops said: Therefore all those who dare to think or teach anything different [about icons], or who follow the accursed heretics in rejecting ecclesiastical traditions . . . or who spurn anything entrusted to the church (whether it be the gospel of the figure of the cross or any example of representational art or any martyr’s holy relic), or who fabricate perverted and evil prejudices against cherishing any of the lawful traditions of the catholic church [which at that time included Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox], or who secularize the sacred objects and saintly monasteries, we order that they be suspended if they are bishops or clerics, and excommunicated if they are monks or lay people. . . . If anyone does not accept representation in art of evangelical scenes, let him be anathema. If anyone does not salute such representations as standing for the Lord and his saints, let him be anathema. . . . [T]he false writings composed against the venerable icons, should be given in at the episcopal building in Constantinople, so that they can be put away along with other heretical books. If someone is discovered to be hiding such books, if he is a bishop, priest or deacon, let him be suspended, and if he is a lay person or a monk, let him be excommunicated.1 In substance, the council concludes that icons are so important that, if a Christian doesn’t salute them (e.g., by kissing them or praying to them as to Christ and the saints), that Christian is to be excommunicated. In fact, the council even orders Christians not to own any books that argue against iconodulia. While neither church would be so harsh today, both of them still believe that Nicaea II infallibly teaches the principle that icons should be venerated. Even Orthodox today do not agree...if you talk to an old Russian Orthodox vs what they call the new Orthodox, you will see they don't agree with each other. How many fingers to use when making the cross symbol, which way to walk around the icons (counterclockwise vs clockwise), or even if there should be a bible verse on the back side of the crosses that's worn. Notice that the council calls iconodulia a tradition of the church. By saying that, the council is claiming that the practice of venerating icons originated with the apostles, and that it has always been an accepted practice in the church. However, the council was simply wrong. History clearly shows that the early church unilaterally rejected the veneration of images for the first centuries following the apostles. In Acts 10:26 Peter lifted him up, saying, “Stand up; I myself am also a man.” Veneration of images was seen as a difference between Christians and pagans/heretics, first century Christians defended themselves against the charge of not having sacred images, pre-Constantinian Christians directly contradicted veneration of images, No pre-Constantinian Christians described Christian veneration of images at all, and early Church Fathers did Not Venerate Icons. The Bible strictly forbids idolatry (Leviticus 26:1; Deuteronomy 5:9). God alone deserves to be bowed down to and worshiped. Icons are not intercessors before the throne of grace, and neither are the saints they represent. People in heaven do not have the power to hear our prayers or grant our requests. Only Jesus Christ and the Holy Spirit can intercede for us before the Father (Romans 8:26-27, 34). We should stay as far away as we can from anything that could possibly lead to idolatry.
Jesus was killed for heresy, and christians follow his example by advocating heresy and getting killed for it, usually by some brutal method akin to the cross like burning at the stake.
@@micahwatz1148 😂😂😂 Thanks for the laugh mr. Protestant. You have much to learn about the true church (yes, the Orthodox church), but first, leave your pride and arrogance at the door.
Heresy is the choice, the authentic, correct one. How Eve acquired knowledge by listening to the suggestion of the Nahash and Ham was the seed of the great civilizations of Egypt and Mesopotamia, revealing to his brothers the idiocy of his father, and above all the heresy of the master Jesus Christified, who hurled the fire of his indignation not against idolatry but against the Pharisees, followers and architects of the Jewish religious and national restoration, enemies of the Hellenic spirit and worshipers of the perverse and criminal god: "You have stolen the key to knowledge". Luke 11.52. Some monks had understood it, wake up brother.
I'm very intruiged by the Orthodox church. I grew up catholic, fell away for 30 years, was born again 3 years ago. Since then I'm searching for my "spiritual home", my flock, "my" people. There a couple of orthodox priests online I really like, especially Mar Mari Emmanuel or father Spyridon Bailey. I even visited the only German(speaking)-Orthodox monastery last year and stayed there for a few days. That being said: I see a LOT wrong with the Orthodox church, and I'm sad about it. Isn't it a heresy, to idolize an organisation of men? To be followers of rules, invented and shaped by the ideas a mere mortals? Rather then a follower of Jesus? A disciple of the most high? I'm very traditional and I like rituals and incense and all of that style - I just can't see it as sound biblical teaching. Nothing like the sacraments are mentioned in the Bible. Not even baptism is of THAT importance, especially not, if you can't decide for yourself. Sacraments and participating in them does not save your soul. That is false unbiblical teaching. And if you want to argue, that there are more writings, more very wise people, having contributed to how it looks today (and for a long time), then you say, these people are as important as the Apostles. Somehow a John Chistostomos is the same as Paul? Konstantin made the faith in the Jewish massiah a Roman thing. So Roman paganism merged with messianic Judaism, that's why there are more important people Orthodox and Romans pray to, other then God. Jwes were pushed out of the picture (anti-semitism) É voilá - very similar witchcraft and occultism continued. "You will be assimilated, resistance is futile." That is how the world, the apparatus, the machine, the enemy does it. It's nothing new. I pretty much gave up looking for some "leader" or "father" (look up if you should call any human that) on the internet or anywhere else outside scripture. It is ONLY that way, I can get the answers God want's you to have. Of course, I need to be honest, challenge myself, question my own believes and motives.
I am in a slightly similar position. I was baptised as an adult from a non- Christisn family. Never confirmed in any church, I was seeking still, and could not find one. Then, after 1 yr of learning to read the bible in Greek ( an all consuming passion that took up my every spare hour during that period, and was my devotion, like a working prayer)led me to Orthodoxy. I found Bisp Ireni’s talks and Fr Josiah on Internet- and heard pure truth everytime. This contrasted with the Church of England falling deeper into obvious error, mirroring a culture what is clearly false, and justifying it. I dare not write more, you can guess what I refer to. Then 1 Cor 11-19 made perfect sense. I visited a ROCOR church, spoke with a wonderful priest. I literally knocked on the door, the chuch was shut. And again it was pure truth, every word he uttered. The correct teaching has been preserved here, all you need do is look at the other churches over the last few years especially to recognise this. When humans interact there will be problems, that is a goven. Yet the Orthodox churches have, even within this limitation, preserved the essence of the faith; eschewing novelty, resisting the temptation to mirror the world. You seem deep and thoughtful, may God lead you to your true home.
Mari Mari Emmanuel is NOT Orthodox! Do not be deceived by him. Listen to Living Orthodox channel with Fr. Michael, he has videos explaining this exact topic. I do love Fr. Spyridon Bailey, Patristic Nectar, Living Orthodox, and Orthodox Ethos channels.
The church isn't an "organization of men". This is a fundamental misunderstanding of what the Bible says the church is. It is the mystical body of Christ Himself. It is not an earthly institution. Jesus said on this rock I will build my church and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it, and the Holy Spirit will lead her into *all* truths. Only one church has preserved the faith unchanged and that is orthodoxy.
If you really think you're so correct why not challenge a few Protestant Scholars to a public debate? I know why you people never have. You scripturally have nothing to stand on. The only thing you can do to try to make your man made traditions sound good is to avoid going directly to the Bible to show book chapter and verse why you believe some of the stuff you teach. You mainly quote someone who lived 1400 years ago yet what he taught is nowhere to be seen in the Bible
And so what? You think that most youtubers you watch dont have scripts prepared? You think that sermons are not prepared in advance? If you focused on the contents rather than small details, you wouldn't mind
I started my Orthodox journey a few months ago. Your videos have given me hope. I have been involved with Protestantism for a great deal of my married life. But I have always read my bible for the last 44 years and I have come to the realization of the heresy of Protestantism and this video has confirmed my recent discoveries. I will no longer champion the destructive lies I once believed. Thank you father.
So proud of you brother! I too have been in Protestantism my whole life but hope to become orthodox Christian by the end of this year. I long for the one true church
Come home to Rome gentleman. May God help your discernment
Rome, GEORGIA?
@@doubtingthomas9117: No..... Rome in Wisconsin. 😊
@@TheZealotsDen
>from one heresy to another
Спасибо отец Иосия за слово!
Хочу поделится свой радостью. Я в детстве был эстонским лютеранином, прошел конфирмацию. В 16 лет всей семьей перешли в Православие, но бабушка не захотела этого и осуждала нас за предательство веры. Спустя 15 лет перед смерью бабуша устала от лекарств и отказалась их есть. Мама пригласила лютеранского пастора для того чтоб он ее приободрил и сказал что нужно принимать помощь врачей. После его ухода мама опять поговорила с бабушкой и она согласилась принять Православие. Теперь я имею счастье молится соборно о душе бабушки Музе. Слава Богу!
God bless you and your journey!!
"If only I was younger."
That line is so powerful. 😭
I know.. He knows his responsibility as a pastor.
Yet he could not leave the church of Calvin anymore, it is so sad..
So timely thanks Father! ☦️
Ironic his channel is called "Truth Unites".
@@dustinneely 💯💯
Good show today. I enjoy Fr. Stephen. God bless. ☦️
Heresy is okay if you tack on a pious statement at the end.
@@dustinneelyits not ironic, at all, but fully logical. Truth unites those who want the Truth, and divides those who want it from those who dont want it.
Thank you, Fr. Josiah! I’m a recent convert to Orthodoxy from Roman Catholicism. God is using you and Dr Eugenia Constantinou teaching our faith in easy to understand with references to the Bible, oral tradition, church fathers.
Two of my favorites!
Interesting talk; content that I will most earnestly and sincerely consider. After having served as a Protestant pastor and missionary (Russia 1992-1996), for 23 years, I left pastoral ministry in 2015. My formal education was in biblical studies and Greek. For the past few months I’ve picked up my Greek New Testament and also have read extensively writings from the Church fathers. For the past 9 years I’ve been adrift, so to speak. While there are a number of theological barriers that I’ve yet to overcome, Orthodoxy has a definite appeal to my heart. Please pray that the issues that I am dealing with be resolved in my heart and mind. Sincere respect and humble gratitude.
go to liturgy, it helps in getting comfortable
"Rock & Sand" is a great book.
It's an awesome book. Just finished it a few days ago.
Half way through it ❤
Thank you for bringing it up here...I just noticed it's up in parts on this Channel.👍
So timely indeed! Thank you for defending the Orthodox faith and preaching the truth Father
Father bless. I hope you understand the impact that your videos have on the Internet. There’s so much garbage on the Internet. It’s so refreshing to be educated by you about the body of Christ and other stuff About our faith.Thank you so very much. May God grant you many years.
Thank you for sharing this wisdom, as always, Father, and God bless! 🙏☦
According of Church’s Fathers the heresy is lepers of soul . Thanks Fr.🙏☦️
Excellent and very timely presentation of this topic Father. Thank you! Glory to God!
Thank you Fr.Josiah Trenham for the continuous encouragement and inspiration 🙏🏼 ☦️
“MyTruthIsm”
vibesism
Thank you Father Josiah, great sermon.
Father thank you I truly need to hear this
My friend told me once: "What is a heresy? It's just a disagreement with the Dogma."
I laughed, because I knew that it's more than that and, since then, started to think about that topic. It is a more interesting theme than I thought it was.
Always appreciative for your teachings, insights and encouragements...may God continue to strengthen your spirit and resolve 🙏☦️♥️
Thessalonians 2 10 And in all the deceit of injustice among those who were dispossessed, because they did not receive the love of the truth to save them;11 And for this reason may God send them the energy of error in that you believe them in a lie,12 That all may be judged who did not believe the truth, but rejoiced in unrighteousness13 And we ought to thank God always for you, brothers beloved by the Lord, because God chose you from the beginning for salvation in the sanctification of the Spirit and the faith of truth,14 to which he called you through our gospel for the care of the glory of our Lord Jesus Christ.15 Therefore, brothers, stand up and keep the traditions that you were taught either by word or by our letter.
Father Josiah has been a gift from God to me in my life. He along with several others on this platform brought me home.
Amen Glory to God
Thank you, father, this is eye opening!
The hierarchy of the Anglican communion, unfortunately particularly the Archbishop of Canterbury could do with giving this one a listen.
St. Raphael of Brooklyn's Letter to the Anglicans is available to read online for free.
@@acekoala457 That's from the 20's, things were unbelievably better back then, recently we had the Archbishop wishing Muslim "brothers" a happy Ramadan, also they have been falsely baptising people, and have made women and others in serious error not just priests but bishops. And selling churches to be transformed into mosques, and condemning the faithful for their faith, and covering up scandal, and much much besides. The whole thing makes me lament, they are endangering the souls of those under them without the least bit of care.
Ah and they are going to give one billion pounds to blacks. While at the same time condemning the African Anglicans for being Christian.
@vorynrosethorn903 I am always shocked to hear christians say that we worship the same God as muslims.. in my mind I'm thinking "wow you don't need to dig to deep before you find nothing but polemics on our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ"
@@Taydutt13 These people aren't Christian, they are liberals (as in the philosophy/ideology) who are associating themselves with the Church for cultural or spiritual reasons, with laymen ignorance is an excuse due to the lacking education within many of these dominations, and the misguided leadership. For those in Holy Orders there is no such excuse, they have put their own God's or weaknesses before their faith in the Father and duty to the Church.
@@vorynrosethorn903
Many of the same Problems existed in the 1920s as to now.
Rampant Ecumenism, Liturgical Disunity, Pet Theologies.
The point is that the letter could still speak to Anglicans now as well as it did in the 1920s.
1 Cor 11-19, wow that speaks to our age.
heresy=heresis=αίρεσις=air.....everything but the Truth=Jesus Christ
ANATHEMA to all heresy.
Jesus was killed for heresy, and christians follow his example by advocating heresy and getting killed for it, usually by some brutal method akin to the cross like burning at the stake.
@@IamAnIdiot35 Blasphemy, Jesus was killed for telling the truth.
@@IamAnIdiot35 Blasphemy.
@@IamAnIdiot35 Jesus was killed for telling the truth.
@@Кивис-ч3й That is how all heretics think about their heretical leader who gets killed for heresy.
When you look 👀 at the Orthodox Church ⛪️ you only see the authenticity of the ancient church. With all the traditions and languages it is traced back to how the church would have been, with all love and respect to Roman Christian’s I pray you come back to the original apostolic Catholic faith😢
If they Leave Heretical baggage behind. Welcome!
Eastern Orthodox never took the gospel worldwide unlike Rome. EO Only cared about serving Serbians,Russian and Greek communities.
@@YourBoyJohnny94Kind of hard to take it world wide when you're busy being persecuted left and right
@ The Apostles and early Christians were under extreme persecution and still spread the Gospel.
@@YourBoyJohnny94 So you're saying the 1 + million Armenians, 20.000 + Soviets, 300.000 + Greeks and the Assyrian - to name a few - who were killed, just should have spread the Gospel instead of getting killed? Not to forget all the other groups that had their priests and bishops imprisoned. Brother, I know it's difficult for us privileged people to relate to these events of the past but I'd still appreciate you to be more kind and understanding when it comes to this.
Great video Father! Would you like to make a video about Matthew 24? A lot of atheist online are using that chapter in such bad ways I think it would be really good to clear things out (when it is talking about the end of times or about the siege of Jerusalim 70 A.D and so on)
Im a Lutheran, but i actually have a lot respect for Orthodoxy
The ultimate respect would be converting.
@mikeporro3311 im good where im at in the Lutheran church, but I appreciate the invitation ✝️🛐
Anathema ! Come to the true Church
@deitchj003 i appreciate the invite and i respect the Orthodox church, but im okay being Lutheran
I would be very happy if these episodes would be uploaded to spotify or apple podcasts
The Confessions.
I Thanks many times to God for Martin Luther & Calvin ! He used them for such a big Revive of the Christian faith!
Heretics outside the church
🙏🏻
I have wondered that myself aftter 35 years or so.
❤☦️
St. Theodore the Studite (9th C.): “Regarding the Faith, the heretics were utterly shipwrecked; but concerning the others, even if in their thinking they did not founder, nevertheless, on account of their communion with heresy, they too were destroyed alongside the others.” (Epistles, Bk. 2, “Epistle 15, To the Patriarch of Jerusalem,” PG 99:1164AB)
The fact that iconoclasm persisted for 150 years makes one think about the people that lived during that time: multiple generations were born, baptized, lived, and died during that period and would have been taught and simply assumed that iconoclasm was the tradition of the church and not heresy. Hindsight is 20/20.
Iconoclasm is the tradition of the church
Because the iconodule confusion isevident. Its clearly a later practice that they justified. Saying things like "Luke painted the first icon." When there is zero proof because they want to justify themselves. Because scripture makes zero mention of the practice in anyway. Because early christian writings give no instructions on it whatsoever. Not even mentioning it in passing. And when they do mention it they exclusively speak negatively of the practice amongst pagans. Aristides, Irenaeus, Hippolytus, Lactantius, Justin Martyr, Origen all speak against it. And, Origen even states explicitly that honor given to an image cannot pass to the one represented. It's hard to agree with Nicea 2 that this was a universal Christian practice then since NONE of them seem interested in it. Yet, somehow it has become absolutely pivotal to the Orthodox faith. @JunkyJeeMail
The church had a norm of icon veneration. Doesn't make it patristic. I'm not sure about your point regarding whether it was about breaking or simply not venerating,. But, as a sidenote early muslims were also not absolutely against images. That was a later reaction to Orthodox piety. Regardless, the church had no basis for such norms. And were forced to justify it. But, no it absolutely does not reflect an Islamic worldview on my part. Thats just an assertion even though my worldview is fundamentally opposed to a Muslim worldview. Its not that matter can't or hasn't been sanctified by the Incarnation. Its that this in no way logically leads one to icon veneration. neither do the scriptures or the early fathers. Thats my point. Do you disagree that the fathers were not venerating icons? @JunkyJeeMail
Right. Icons didn't appear in the 7th century. They also weren't common place in the 1st, 2nd, or 3rd based on all the available evidence. Why is that not a problem in your eyes? Why is the fabrication of history like that of "luke venerating icons" not concerning to you. And no, the mere presence of images is not the same thing as icon veneration so finding a rudimentary picture of Jesus in a catacomb somewhere is not good evidence for your position. The convenience of your position is that in the end one merely appeals to the authority of the church on any issue. And dismisses the paucity of scriptural support. And then pretends that I am dismissing the implications of the incarnation; but I am not. The honor conferred to an image does not transfer to the one displayed in the image. This isn't merely my opinion but that of the early church fathers. @JunkyJeeMail
There are many heresies, but ecumenism is the greatest!
No
The greatest heresy was/is the filioque.
Do not rank evils
@@micahwatz1148 To those saying ecumenism isn’t the greatest heresy, it is obvious you don’t understand what you’re saying no to. Ecumenism is the means by which the filioque, Arianism, Nestorianism, Monophysitism etc, would be allowed to contaminate the Church. It is the greatest threat.
@@johnvanderschuit see my response below.
I have a lot of respect for Father Josiah and enjoy much of this content, as we share many of the same values, but I think the issue I have is that if Orthodoxy is the one and only means of salvation, why hasn't the EOC done more in the way of evangelism. To your churches credit, many of them recognize this shortcoming but it still begs the question. As with most Americans, I come from a long line of devout Protestants, many of whom spreading the Gospel is central to the faith. So for a church to make the claim as the one and only, and have such a relatively small history/impact of outreach compared to Protestants and Catholics. Well, the disconnect is obvious. Also, if you truly believe, this, I would recommend a push to get your people to invite others to an EOC service...outside of their own ethnic communities. Something you'll never see lacking in the Protestant/Evangelical side of the fence. The message I get from looking at this as well as other EOC content is more of a "come and find us but don't expect an invitation and the onus is all on you" no matter the distance or lack of ethic diversity (apparently this is an issue with many congregations and the welcome is not always a warm one - again, getting this from the honest feedback of some of your fellow EOC content providers).
Let me end this by saying, there's a great deal I admire about your faith. There is an obvious beauty and historicity to it. And I don't doubt it has produced many great heroes of the Christian faith. But this question has always bothered me when I hear claims such as the one made here.
Blessings.
I suggest you go to ubi petrus youtube channel. He is doing a while video on this that completely discredits this false assertion. Some orthodox will acknowledge this out of their own ignorance on the topic.
The orthodox church was one with the catholic for 1000 years. So all the evangelism that was done in the first millennium was by us.
Then we were dealing with Islam, and communism but despite this, the true faith and evangelism made its way to the likes of Alaska, where actually the indigenous people who converted write that the western catholics and their evangelization was absolutely terrible, and brutal. We hear of mass Graves near orphanages.
whereas the orthodox evangelize the *correct way* and made many disciples.
There are orthodox churches in Alaska, Africa, Japan, China and to this day many missionary work being done.
However, even considering protestant and catholic missionary work as such is disingenuous as the apostles never stood and told people to say one prayer or "accept Jesus as savior" and then made them part of the church. It was a much longer process.
It took discipleship for over a year to make sure the person was sure why they were converting.
This is also in the great commission to make them disciples first *then* baptize them.
Lastly, your false idea of what evangelism looks like or what you think should have happened in 2000 years which is nothing but 2 days to God is what is wrong. As of today, we are seeing mass conversions to our churches in the last 5 years. So evangelism is still happening to this day and our saints prophesied this and said that there will be a period where God will draw so many to the church.
I think the video I suggested will help as he has many sources in it. God bless.
I was raised Protestant but detached from Protestantism years ago, having never been a fan of the Reformers. Although I was baptized into the Lutheran Church as a child, today I embrace Orthodox theology.
I believe your question concerns both doctrinal purity and a bit of eschatology, but first I need to offer a bit of context.
On several occasions I have heard both Orthodox and Roman Catholic priests referring to the Church as the _Vine_ in an attempt to cultivate love for the Church. While this seems innocent at first glance, as a student of the bible, I could not help but be reminded of the words of Jesus in John's Gospel:
"I am the vine, ye are the branches: He that abideth in me, and I in him, the same bringeth forth much fruit: for without me ye can do nothing." (John 15:5)
The Church, of course, is _not_ the vine but rather the Lord's body, meaning his branches -- both individually and in aggregate.
I view any reference to the Church as the vine to be a challenge to the headship of Christ and thus to his infallibility.
I later learned that the RCC holds the doctrine of Church Infallibility, meaning its traditions and also its Magisterium are not to be challenged. While the Orthodoxy lacks this degree of formalization, it holds a similar perspective.
I believe that the Lord's letters to the 7 churches in Revelation are an answer to all of this, as he addresses both doctrinal impurity and also the fragmentation of Christendom itself. That is apparent in the fact that there are 7 churches and that each body of believers is separately rebuked.
It cannot be the case that the Church is without developed traditions or doctrine that may at times be contrary to the words of Jesus, as these letters of correction divinely reveal.
Consequently, when the Church of Sardis (as one example) claims to be the _one, true Church,_ or declares that the Church of Laoedicea or Ephesus or Smyrna are outside the faith, these claims are at odds with the words of Jesus that _He alone_ is the vine from which his branches receive life.
Orthodoxy has been under constant persecution for 2,000 years. The Roman Catholic institution blocked the Orthodox Church from the West until fairly recently. There's missions in many places now.
It isn't the Gospel being spread if the theology has errors.
@@PETERJOHN101All of those churches were in the one overall Church. They weren't separate bodies like Protestantism. We still have some of those churches left in the Orthodox Church.
It would be like Constantinople claiming to be the one true Church by itself over the other 13 churches in the one Church.
I agree
☦️☦️☦️
Heresy is difficult to define or pin down, but this much can be said with confidence: Pretty much EVERTHING that passes for Christianity today is Heresy,
Father Josiah's homilies are case studies in the superiority of Christianity. Christianity challenges each person to adopt a higher way of living. Christianity confronts the world and announces the sins of the world, boldly, but without violence and criminality. Christianity announces the sins of each person and demands that they admit those sins and apologize for those sins and commit themselves to a different way of living in the name of Christ, who Christians believe was God among us. There is nothing else like this on Earth, and it seeks something wholly different from all other belief systems and in a totally different way.
Thank you Father, yes just like Ecumenism the new Heresy
Please tell us about new pente costal movement and it's difference from early traditional orthodox teaching .
Hello Father, and thank you for this overview. My difficulty is in the fact that while I now embrace Orthodox theology, the EOC considers me Prelest due to a vision of Christ I experienced in 2010. I later wrote a book about my experience and now teach prophecy from the Bible online. While I am no longer Protestant and would like to join the EOC, I cannot because I am considered Prelest. Do you (or anyone) have any thoughts on my situation that you might want to share? God bless.
Yes brother, you are in a 'spiritual delusion', elder Cleopa Ilie was saying "It is much more usefull for you to see your own sins than to see angels!". I recommend you to do a self-diagnose by reading the writing of russian: St. Tikhon of Zadonsk, St Ignatiis Brianchaninov and "On aquisition of the Holy Spirit" by St Seraphim of Sarov. Read this lectures and get back with an answer. May GOD help you to become enlighten!
I’m a very picky eater and only eat meat. I work a laborious job and am a catechumen. I’m struggling with the idea of lent I want to participate but I’m worried if I give up meat and dive into fasting I’ll be in trouble.
Have you spoken to your priest about it? Sought advice from the faithful during coffee hour?
God bless you on your journey!
The fast is to not punish you but to deny oneself. The important thing is prayer and fasting but do so with the guidance of your spiritual father.
Ask your priest, he doesn't want you to hurt yourself or set yourself up for failure. There's economia, remember! Mine doesn't even expect catechumens to fast, so always check with him for these things, don't just go it alone.
Talk to your priest. I’m also carnivore for mental health reasons and my priest said I can just eat fish and sea food during lent, and fast days. It’s very hard but it’s doable
Hello, brother! Those who work a hard/physical job are released from fasting. Find some good priest to whom you can open your heart and talk to him about this. I am sure he will say you the same. Keep going, you are on the right way, brother, I assure you! God be with you and you with God! Best regards from orthodox Serbia and Macedonia!
Father, Im not Christian but I appreciate your work. However, adding a bit more context for those of us who didnt grow up with Christianity would greatly increase our (my) understanding. Thank you again!
It appears that this priest doesn't respond personally to questions in these comment sections but I'd like to hear more about the church fathers teaching regarding "protestant heresies" mentioned at 7:06
Protestantism being a much later development. Perhaps there were "faith alone" teachers in the patricistic period?
☦🕊🕯❤🕯🕊☦
@patristicnectarfilms can you make a video about the 1991 agreement where the Antiochian Synod went into communion with the monophysites. Some Antiochian priests are adamant that they are in communion with the monophysites. Some are not.
I was personally extremely heart broken when I found out about this.
Are there any videos that explain what the "faith" actually is? What does one have to believe in to be "saved"?
Come and see. Find a Church and participate. Participation is everything. As for books that explain the faith, you might try the Bible (sorry for the hint of sarcasm.)
Start with the Gospel. I like St. Matthew then St. John to fill in the gaps and expand on things the synoptic Gospels leave out.
I know the Bible can be difficult to understand. Father Stephen de Young has a great Bible study podcast called The Whole Counsel of God that has helped me greatly.
Above all, seek to know God and He will reveal himself to you. As you come to know Him, things become more clear.
Pray to Him. Speak to Him humbly, acknowledging that you are not the master here. This is what it means to "knock and the way will be opened unto you."
Ask for wisdom and understanding, love and guidance. He will make himself known.
God bless you.
Orthodox do not believe in salvation here and now. It is life long process that is decided by the God once we depart from this world and our soul is brought up before the God. Proper question could have been - how do the Orthodox prepare themselves for that glorious event.? Lord commandment is - Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father who is in heaven is perfect (Matt 5, 48). How do we perfect ourselves.? Personal asceticism... by praying, fasting, confessing, communing, attending services, controlling our thoughts, reading Bible and other spiritual books, visiting monasteries, etc.
I understand what you’re saying, but I’m honestly confused as to why you single out Luther. Chemnitz, Luther, Melanchthon, and other reformers had even attempted to reunite with the East. Lutherans are only called that because after 100 years of being called Lutherans as a pejorative term the name stuck. Confessional Lutheranism is way closer to Orthodoxy than Roman Catholicism. As someone who grew up Presbyterian as well I have been open to becoming Orthodox, but am becoming an LCMS Lutheran. I genuinely don’t understand why there is such antipathy towards a tradition which reintroduced Eastern Fathers into the conversation in the West. I completely understand that part of the orthodox perspective is that the visible church is an important boundary between us theologically, but I really don’t understand why people are treated like half brothers in Christ instead of full brothers. Shouldn’t it be based upon our love for God and for one another? There really is very little that I can’t fully assent to about Orthodoxy. I just don’t think the attitude of anathematizing people who I know for a fact Christ has transformed. I don’t think that’s a crazy position to take.
There’s a huge difference between the first generation of Reformers who genuinely had the goal of reforming the Catholic Church and the “reformed” like Calvin and Zwingli who were trying to innovate. It’s like there’s a bond between Catholics and Orthodox Christians over their differences with “Protestants.” Realistically though I don’t know what anyone would expect from Luther or others in the situation they were in.
Our family in Christ are those we are in communion with because they are in the Body of Christ. This is how it's always been since the first century. It's not to be rude or anything but just a reality.
They're not anathematized, they're just not part of the Church.
@@williampeters9838There's no bond at all.
”And John answered and said, Master, we saw one casting out devils in thy name; and we forbad him, because he followeth not with us. And Jesus said unto him, Forbid him not: for he that is not against us is for us.“
Luke 9:49-50
@@LadyMariaThat is a wild statement.
Father Josiah: the Church from the beginning has disagreed on some theological matters. As long as our belief does not go outside the established Creed (ie, the Niceene Creed), it becomes a difference of opinion and not a heresy!
Heresy is stronger than Falsity, because Heresy is falsity applied to spiritual things.
So Luther was 100% right at the time, tried to reform the Catholic church, yet excommunicated by sticking to the Bible, and he is the heresy? What Luther should've done in your opinion, after all that he tried? What would you have sone if you were in his shoes?
Thank you father for your reflection, I’m not sure if you take questions here, I am really torn at what entails heresy, the confusion comes because I thought the following is heresy but seeing that our church is allowing it because of economy, not sure what to believe. Here in Australia, some of our Antiochian orthodox churches are communing the Maronites (this is a RC sect under the see of Rome) who are married or linked by marriage to our Orthodox brethren. If our leaders are allowing this, then is it not heresy? Yet communion with schismatic churches is known to be heretic because it’s outside of communion in truth. lol please help!
We are not "protestingsting'
Father, can you do a commentary on the break away group called the TOC (True Orthodox) that split from ROCOR about 15 years ago when unification with Moscow Patriach occurred. Half my family follow this breakaway church and have disowned me and it's caused me so much pain and grief. They accuse me of being a heretic but we beleive them to be the misguided ones. We still love them but they show only anger or silence in return. I go to ROCOR and SOC churches as my husband is Serbian Orthodox. They have intense hatred for my choice to stay with ROCOR and my husband. I can't understand the issued and why they think I'm damned to hell for staying with the main Orthodox church. It's so painful. I feel that their actions which lack any Christian love is not beneficial even if they believe themselves to be in the correct church. I'm so confused what to do. I can't leave my church to join them - I don't believe they are correct. Please explain more... I know many families in Australia like mine that still suffer abandonment from their relatives and it's very very distressing. Are we all Orthodox or is the TOC now considered heretics?
You are in THE CHURCH, thank God! The TOC and GOC are just as you call it, break away sects. They are not part of THE CHURCH. I’m sure Father Josiah can elaborate. In the meantime, listen on UA-cam to Orthodox Talks with Fr. Kosmas “zeal without knowledge”. It will help you with this subject.
I can’t see my previous comment, but the the video on UA-cam by Orthodox talks is called, “zeal that comes from pride”. It will help you with this topic. You are part of THE CHURCH, thank God! The TOC and GOC are not part of THE CHURCH. Hopefully, Fr. Josiah can make a video about this topic.
You are on the correct path, brother. Stay there.
Stay away from sergianism
Orthodox Talks with Fr. Kosmas has a video on this topic called zeal that comes from pride. It will help you with the topic. You are in the church, stay there. The TOC and GOC are not part of the Church. Pray for your family to come back to the church.
I’m stuck between Roman Catholicism and orthodoxy Catholicism.
How is it you would describe the status of salvation for people who live being deceived under heresies such as Calvinism, Charismatics, etc? Even though they worship God through a corrupted faith, it seems that God still works through them even if they fully do not understand. For we shall know them by their fruits, for God calls us to believe in Him and Jesus's sacrifice, to be baptized, and to live and be in Christ.
Lest, Orthodoxy would claim to the same aberrations of Calvinism, that some were predestined to Hell--those who were never exposed to Orthodoxy.
Can you judge people for accepting what they have received? Many in America, especially rural America, have never been exposed to Orthodoxy.
In rural America there are fewer immigrants from Orthodox countries and so there is no established Orthodox Church in these areas. Personally, I would never have known about the Church without the internet and I have to drive an hour and a half to get to one. It's worth it to me, but most people I talk to think I'm crazy. Protestants I talk to try to talk me into going to a closer church, but they don't understand my reasoning.
Anyway, those who have not been exposed to true Christianity and still love God are doing the best they can with what they have received. God is no more bound to the Church than He was to the Temple. Just as when He came in the flesh, those who love the Living God will know Him and allow Him to work through them. God will judge us based on what we did with what we received. We who have received the fullness of the faith have a responsibility to produce fruit accordingly.
War is terrible, but the war in Ukraine may bring more immigrants from Orthodox countries and will perhaps seed more churches in the West. "What man meant for evil, God turned to good."
@@troyhavok8605I think your argument could also be used to support pluralism and universalism. But Scripture does not support your position: it makes many highly exclusivistic claims, especially from Jesus Himself.
We cannot love Someone we do not know.
@@troyhavok8605 We do not judge anyone outside the church.
That is up to God. What we do know is salvation is normative through the church which the literal body of Christ, and there is only one body.
At the same time, God can of course save anyone outside the church He pleases by joining them in a way unknown to us, to His body, His church.
We believe in His endless mercy of course and we also believe that everyone will be judged according to what they knew.
If they knowingly rejected orthodoxy, that is different than someone that's never heard of it but tries to love God with all their heart and live according to his commandments.
This however shouldn't mean we shouldn't want to live out our orthodoxy for our own salvation but also so that people around us come to orthodoxy as well. We should desire that every person comes to the full Truth in this life.
God's general grace does work everywhere and will meet us where we're at in life, even despite our errors, but God's goal is always to draw us closer to the church and the true FULL faith. If we are humble, then this will happen , as it has to million of protestants converting to orthodoxy. If we're prideful, then we will resist orthodoxy.
@@icxcnika2037 wondering why you called Fr Calvin Robinson “brother” then?
@thewiseandthefoolish Who called him brother? lol
Brother doesn't necessarily mean a brother in Christ, it can be a term of endearment for we are brothers in humanity. But no he isn't in the church and therefore he isn't a brother in Christ in the full sense of the term.
As soon as Christ ascended and the Holy Apostles were taken from us, it was only a matter of time before things began to go in different directions. Indeed, even in the days of the Apostles, things were already splintering.
Trinitarians are following their conscience, according to the light each is given. What is the line between perfect orthodox belief and heresy is often either a matter of one's faith, with scant evidence to back the assertions. No one can know another's motives. Only Christ sits upon the Bema seat.
So we can go on casting anathemas around or we can be a bit more charitable to one another in conversation and prayer. We ought to at least consider our Lord's admonition in the Gospel of Mark regarding the man casting out demons in Jesus' name. We may look at others that they are not "with us", but they are not against you; they are also "for YHWH".
Thank you. Is it possible to be orthodox in terms of belief and practice, while also being part of a Protestant/evangelical church? There are people who are Christ-like in how they treat others, loving people in a way that reflects Jesus. Maybe they don’t have the title “Orthodox” with a capital O, but in practice they live the true faith.
I know people who are capital O Orthodox, yet come off as cold towards others and indifferent to the suffering.
I myself belong to multiple church communities, both Orthodox and evangelical. While my theological leanings are generally towards what would be considered orthodoxy, I’m also connected to evangelicals who share 99.9% of the same beliefs of Jesus. That .1% of difference is on debatable issues (roles for women in the church, holy days) We’re all still learning together to better know and understand Jesus and reflect Him to the world around us.
Nope. Two masters can not be served... Matthew 6, 24-26
Jesus said those that trust in him and obey His word will be saved. The doers not merely the hearers.
I think that means anybody who does that, EO Catholics or protestant
@@christaboveallyt Do you obey His word He said in Mark 16, 16.?
No.
@@johnnyd2383
Mark 16:16 ESV
[16] Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned.
yes.
Why are people saying it is timely? What happened?
@@phlebas9204 I see. Thank you for explaining!
A
I think it's easier to follow sound doctrine than consider all the heresies. Saint John of Damascus lists 103 heresies giving some of them alternative names which they are also known. This was more than 1000 years before nihilism which sounds a bit like the first one "barbarism". Barbarism was a heresy where man would live by his own will alone. Nihilism denies God's existence therefore leaving man to only his own will. IMHO
Most doctrines came about as a result of responding to heresies.
Heresy is any belief or theory that strongly opposes established beliefs or customs, particularly the accepted beliefs or religious law of a religious organization. Within Christianity, it is any belief or practice that explicitly undermines the gospel. It is a threat to the unity and orthodoxy of the faith, and historically, the identification and condemnation of heresies have played a significant role in shaping the development of Christian theology. Learn the Greek definition of heresy, biblical and historical examples, and the difference between heresy and blasphemy.
According to Easton's Bible Dictionary, the word heresy comes from a Greek word, meaning a self-chosen opinion or the sect holding that opinion. Heresies came to be understood as self-chosen doctrines that do not originate from God.
Wouldn't heresy be anything that God and Jesus did not support, such as saved by grace/faith without works and without obedience to God's commandments, praying to statues, praying to anyone other than God, and claiming transubstantiation?
Why exactly is Martin Luther considered a heretic in Eastern Orthodoxy?
Sola fide and Sola scriptura
Because he wasn’t an Orthodox Christian.
@@thebugman8696 The problem with that is, those who deny that we are justified by faith preach nothing but the law, nullifying the gospel of grace.
But I suppose eastern spiritualist mystics playing under the guise of Christianity have no concept of human sin, and being justified, that is, to be declared righteous by the merits of Christ imputed to us through faith, don't really care about the gospel of grace.
@@guyontheinternet8891 So it sounds like faith merits salvation, is that correct? Also, who gets to determine who Christ is. If I have faith in a Christ but I believe Christ to be a created creature of God subject to God's will, am I still a Christian?
@@guyontheinternet8891Amen. Well said. If I’m a heretic for believing in the biblical doctrine of justification and the double imputation of Jesus Christ, then I guess I’ll be a heretic!
Outside of the scriptures we have no other writings that are breathed out by God, so by default the scripture is the highest authority for man. So everything that men say is subject to the higher authority of scripture. Scripture alone is the sole, INFALLIBLE rule of faith. And please spare me the church gave us the Bible rant. James White has destroyed that argument in many of his debates on sola Scriptura. Jesus himself placed scripture as the highest authority in Mark chapter 7.
Thank You fathers 🙏🙏🙏Amen,Amen,Amen
I respect your content Father. Do you truly believe that people who dutifully attempt to dedicate their life to Christ but who come to a different logical conclusion on dogmatic interpretation are “not saved”? This would seem antithetical to Christ’s teachings that intent of the heart to do right and follow God are primary to any designation or claimed sect.
Yes, and the condescending attitude is a definite turn off to fellow Christians who are not Orthodox. Maybe the early church father, who first initiated the use of icons and said to “venerate” them was misguided and unintentional heretical. Humans are not infallible so unless it is the word of God, we cannot be sure. When I visited an Orthodox Church in Jordan, the parishioners were bowing down before the icons and kissing them (covered with glass). As an outsider, this looks like worshipping to me!!!
God bless. Don't visit Meteora just very soon. :(
Father...some brevity, please.
“Lutheranism” and “Calvinism” were pejoratives applied by the Church of Rome when it was resisting being reformed of its own heresies. Lutherans called themselves Evangelicals and Calvinists called themselves Reformed, and both saw their own beliefs as catholic and orthodox.
Yeah, and look where that has led. 50,000 different denominations in America alone, all believing in their own self made doctrines. True heresy
@@eggsbacon1538You just made up that number. Nobody thinks that
Its apprx 43,000 😘😂 @@norala-gx9ld
every heretic thinks that. mormons and jehovas witnesses both think they revived the ancient church. What calvin and luther taught is not what the 1st millennium church taught their views spring from medieval nominalism. This is solidly demonstrated through Church history. Their innovations are just another aberration in reaction to rome's aberrations.
next you'll tell me that the Democratic People's Republic of Korea is a "democratic" "people's" "republic"
Doesn't change that they are man made doctrines and faiths with no connection to the Faith of the Apostles.
These are grumblers, complainers, walking according to their own lusts; and they mouth great swelling words, flattering people to gain advantage. But you, beloved, remember the words which were spoken before by the apostles of our Lord Jesus Christ: how they told you there would be mockers in the last time who would walk according to their own ungodly lusts. Jude 16-18
Fr Josiah, realised that you have done videos on BOTH Martin Luthers in recent weeks. 😂
You quote pope benedict and yet say protestants have no connection to orthodoxy. The church in germany followed luther, the church in england followed cramer and others. The RCC and OCC love to say that protestants have no connection with catholicism. But we came out of Rome. And classical protestants looked to the fathers and scripture to reform the errors that were in Rome. So to say we have no connection is a play on words. We, as classical protestsnts, hold to catholicity. Other than that, love your work.
I was brought up having nuns and brothers almost spit when they used the word heretic, later in life I looked up it's meaning, a person of free thought, not constained by dogma, I've been a proud heretic since that day.
Interesting. Your description of heresy seemed to describe the traceable developments within Eastern Orthodoxy itself.
So, yes, reductionism can be a problem - but far less so than syncretism. After all, the Prophets were very often reductionistic compared to the idolatrous priestly cult. And while the faith has always been purely given it has never so remained for long. But to create an illusion that it remains is to do what the Pharisees did before Christ and especially medieval Christians did later. Imagining that their innovations always existed, they proposed an authoritative oral tradition that just somehow never made it into Scripture. They had to. The contrasts were so clear.
Thus, when Jesus came, no pure Church could be found. Nevertheless, He built it and hell did not prevail. Yet, just as we read about beginning to happen even in the apostolic age, there wouldn't be the next time either.
Until then, here's the bottom line: Catholics and Eastern Os preach the Church as Gospel, which is already a form of idolatry. Oral tradition is used to justify their many novelties. Whereas, Protestants preach Christ as the Gospel. And they seek faithful via Scripture in terms of doctrine. Nothing could be more apostolic than that.
So, we find Clement of Alexandria (d. ca. 216) saying, “But those who are ready to toil in the most excellent pursuits, will not desist from the search after truth, till they get the information from the Scriptures themselves” (Stromata 7:16).
Hippolytus of Rome (d. 235) affirmed his belief in the Scriptures, saying, “There is, brethren, one God, the knowledge of whom we gain from the Holy Scriptures and no other source” (Against the Heresy of One Noetus 9).
In AD 370, Bishop Basil of Caesarea wrote, “Therefore let God-inspired Scripture decide between us; and on which side be found doctrines in harmony with the word of God, in favour of that side will be cast the vote of truth” (Letter 189:3).
Ambrose (340?-396), “How can we use those things which we do not find in the Holy Scriptures?” (Ambr. Offic., 1:23).
Athanasius (300?-375),
“The Holy Scriptures, given by inspiration of God, are of themselves sufficient toward the discovery of truth. (Orat. adv. Gent., ad cap.) “The holy Scripture is of all things most sufficient for us” (To the Bishops of Egypt 1:4)." "The Catholic Christians will neither speak nor endure to hear anything in religion that is a stranger to Scripture; it being an evil heart of immodesty to speak those things which are not written,” (Athanasius, Exhort. ad Monachas).
“Vainly then do they run about with the pretext that they have demanded Councils for the faith’s sake; for divine Scripture is sufficient above all things; but if a Council be needed on the point, there are the proceedings of the Fathers, for the Nicene Bishops did not neglect this matter, but stated the doctrine so exactly, that persons reading their words honestly, cannot but be reminded by them of the religion towards Christ announced in divine Scripture.” (Athanasius, De Synodis, 6).
We ought not to deliver even the most casual remark without the Holy Scriptures: nor be drawn aside by mere probabilities and the artifices of argument. Do not then believe me because I tell thee these things, unless thou receive from the Holy Scriptures the proof of what is set forth: for this salvation, which is of our faith, is not by ingenious reasonings, but by proof from the Holy Scriptures...Let us then speak nothing concerning the Holy Ghost but what is written; and if anything be not written, let us not busy ourselves about it. The Holy Ghost Himself spoke the Scriptures; He has also spoken concerning Himself as much as He pleased, or as much as we could receive. Be those things therefore spoken, which He has said; for whatsoever He has not said, we dare not say. (Cyril of Jerusalem, Catechetical Lectures, 4.17ff)
What then is our reply? We do not think that it is right to make their prevailing custom the law and rule of sound doctrine. For if custom is to avail for proof of soundness, we too, surely, may advance our prevailing custom; and if they reject this, we are surely not bound to follow theirs. Let the inspired Scripture, then, be our umpire, and the vote of truth will surely be given to those whose dogmas are found to agree with the Divine words. (Gregory of Nyssa, Dogmatic Treatises, Book 12. On the Trinity, To Eustathius.)
Let us not therefore carry about the notions of the many, but examine into the facts. For how is it not absurd that in respect to money, indeed, we do not trust to others, but refer this to figures and calculation; but in calculating upon facts we are lightly drawn aside by the notions of others; and that too, though we possess an exact balance, and square and rule for all things, the declaration of the divine laws? Wherefore I exhort and entreat you all, disregard what this man and that man thinks about these things, and inquire from the Scriptures all these things; and having learnt what are the true riches, let us pursue after them that we may obtain also the eternal good things; which may we all obtain, through the grace and love towards men of our Lord Jesus Christ, with Whom, to the Father and the Holy Spirit, be glory, might, and honor, now and ever, and world without end. Amen.” (John Chrysostom, Homily on 2 Corinthians, 13.4)
For the reasonings of any men whatsoever, even though they be [true Christians], and of high reputation, are not to be treated by us in the same way as the canonical Scriptures are treated. We are at liberty, without doing any violence to the respect which these men deserve, to condemn and reject anything in their writings, if perchance we shall find that they have entertained opinions differing from that which others or we ourselves have, by the divine help, discovered to be the truth. I deal thus with the writings of others, and I wish my intelligent readers to deal thus with mine. (St Augustine, Letters, 148.15)
Habakkuk 3:9
Thy bow was made quite naked (bare),
according to the oaths of the tribes
(oaths were sworn over your arrows),
even thy word. Selah.
Thou didst cleave (divided) the earth
with rivers.
💘
The Orthodox Church or churches accepted the Filioque for use by the Western Church, as a response to heresy denying the divinity of the Holy Spirit in the seventh and eighth centuries. Sometimes it was an issue, sometimes it wasn't. Yet, one cannot read the farewell dialogs in John 15 and 16 without recognizing that it is a valid understanding, especially when the Catholic Church has acknowledged that the source of the Holy Spirit is the Father and procession, when it comes to Christ, does not mean as the source, but it would accept the understanding of proceeds through the Son. When Jesus breathed on the disciples and said, “receive the Holy Spirit" seems like a slam dunk to me. Now could it have been handled differently? Yes, that's a different argument. In fact, at the time of the schism in 1054 no one on either side thought it would be permanent. There was great cooperation during the initial crusades and the continued schism was political more than religious. Attempts at reunification happened and even when agreed to by the bishops of the entire eastern church ended up being negated by one Eastern bishop. If the pope had done that you would claim invalid primacy, yet if a single bishop does that in the east it's okay?
Similarly, the Orthodox constantly claim heresy when the Western Church defines anything. Purgatory is a heresy. Yet the Orthodox Church maintains that there is a place or state of purification where the soul will benefit from prayer. Original sin the way Catholics explain it is heresy to them. The Orthodox maintain that original sin brought death and separated man from God. Catholics of course would not disagree. Simply a different understanding based upon culture but with the same result. Now, if the Catholic Church had stated that Jesus was the source of the Trinity or abrogated the order of the Trinity, that would be a different story. If the Catholic Church denied the divinity of any members of the Holy Trinity, denied baptism, denied holy orders, denied the requirement of faith and works for Salvation, or denied any number of dogmatic principles that are agreed upon by the East and the West then I would understand. The Orthodox will resort to “it's a mystery” When they want to refute a Catholic definition.
But the Orthodox argue about terminology, or the attempt to use a word to define something. For instance, the Orthodox believe that the bread and wine are transformed into the body and blood of Jesus. The Catholics believe the same. Yet, add the word transubstantiation and the Orthodox cry heresy. It is simply a word that the West used to define a transformation that was taking place. Such is the difference I guess between the East and the West culturally. But it is not a cause for schism. Especially not when considered in the light of the paragraphs below.
I would like to reference the Jerusalem Synod of the Orthodox Church of 1672, called because the ecumenical patriarch was in heresy and had become a Protestant. The beliefs as stated are identical to those of the Catholic Church. In terms of the Eucharist: "Further, that in every part, or the smallest division of the transmuted bread and wine there is not a part of the Body and Blood of the Lord - for to say so were blasphemous and wicked - but the entire whole Lord Christ substantially, that is, with His Soul and Divinity, or perfect God and perfect man. This is just an example., transmuted, not transubstantiated, so one is okay and the other is Heresy. But wait, it gets better. A little later in the paragraph it reads: "the bread of the Prothesis* set forth in all the several Churches, being changed and transubstantiated, becomes, and is, after consecration, one and the same with That in the Heavens." Oh my goodness, the word transubstantiated. The difference in the word is only a difference in the tense. So how is it now a heresy if the Orthodox church never changes its teaching?
Now let's get to that pesky purgatory. That same council said the following: "And the souls of those involved in mortal sins, who have not departed in despair but while still living in the body, though without bringing forth any fruits of repentance, have repented - by pouring forth tears, by kneeling while watching in prayers, by afflicting themselves, by relieving the poor, and finally by showing forth by their works their love towards God and their neighbor, and which the Catholic Church has from the beginning rightly called satisfaction - [their souls] depart into Hades, and there endure the punishment due to the sins they have committed. But they are aware of their future release from there, and are delivered by the Supreme Goodness, through the prayers of the Priests, and the good works which the relatives of each do for their Departed" Ok, so they don't call it purgatory. And a descripcion of exactly what the Catholic Church teaches is called heresy because it is called purgatory. The fact is the hypocrisy of the Orthodox Church is glaring.
Now, you are concerned about heresy regarding the above issues, which I have shown are really non-issues. Let's look at another issue. I believe you at some point in this video or another discuss Hesychasm. Let's look at the writings of St Gregory Palamus, who claimed the Cappadocian Fathers agreed with him but there is no evidence of this. We are not talking about the procession of the Holy Spirit here. We are talking about the very nature of God. He separates God's Essence from his Energies in a way that goes against the Council of Nicaea. Against opposition he also describes the Essence of God lying above and a divinity or Godhead that is lower. If this is not absolute heresy I don't know what is. He also stated that those who have obtained spiritual and supernatural grace have become entirely God. He went so far as to say that those who attain it become uncreated. This even caused the chief opponent of his, who wrote against papal primacy, to convert to Roman Catholicism and become a Catholic Bishop. Yet despite this obvious heresy the Roman church has not condemned Orthodoxy for it. Why? Because despite differences in understanding these are teachings which although heterodox will not affect the salvation of the souls of the faithful. Neither will the filioque. And that is a lot more in keeping with traditional Catholic Orthodox thought than St Gregory.
But where are the Orthodox now? There is a schism between the Russian Orthodox Church and the Ecumenical Patriarch of Constantinople. You have no head. Therefore you have no church, you have churches. There is not an organization that has ever been conceived that does not have a head. While Christ is the head of the church he established a temporal head of the church for the purpose of preventing such problems. There is no power within the temporal church in Orthodoxy to call a council, to resolve the dispute between the ecumenical patriarch and the Russian Orthodox Patriarch, and it seems to be more like fighting children than a church. Yes we do have problems in the Catholic Church. Pope Francis is not my favorite pope, I will tell you that. I do agree that there have been a lot of abuses in the church since Vatican II, not as a result directly of Vatican II, but mainly because of the social context in the West in which it occurred. But The Pope has the power to put the German bishops in their place and to keep the church united in a much more effective manner than the Orthodox Church has been able to. The much anticipated Pan- Orthodox Council of 2016 amounted to a lot of infighting and disagreement and really resulted in nothing, except for some Orthodox claiming that the ecumenical patriarch was trying to act like a pope. Furthermore the Russian Orthodox Patriarch has declared the Russian attack on Ukraine as a holy war. He has claimed sole jurisdiction in Ukraine. I don't see anything like this happening in the Catholic Church.
There is plenty to criticize about the Orthodox Church or churches, and a true study shows that it has not maintained the faith exactly as promulgated in the Great councils. It has maintained the outward look of piety and orthodoxy but has as many problems as the Catholic Church. However, these criticisms do not make the Orthodox Church invalid. Your criticisms do not make the Catholic Church invalid either. God bless.
@@frankrosenbloom brother I don’t know if you‘ll read this after 4 months but after I read your reply on a comment under the video of fr. Josiah about the blessings of the pope, I in fact read all of your comments on this channel and want to thank you for being one of a few people who shares this kind of information.
I was thinking also about converting to orthodoxy. You have to know that I am an Albanian catholic living in Germany and the situation here with the lgbtq community is outrageous I can tell you. It’s destroying my heart to see our beloved church do such things and I wish the pope would do something about it and because of that I was so frustrated and thought about converting to orthodoxy because they don’t have those kind of problems
But after seeing documentary’s and articles on the problems of the Orthodox Church with its leaders and among the patriarchs themselves going so far that orthodox Christian’s for example are calling the patriarch of Constantinople a heretic is very problematic and it just points out the problems that you described in your comment.
They drop the word „heretic“ like it is nothing and that is just sad.
Also not to forget is that the priest and orthodox Christian’s are calling us heretics while their patriarchs are meeting with the RC church and visiting each other, they even hold church services as well as the eucharist together, you don’t do that with heretics.
Also that the patriarch kyril of Russia is promising every fallen Russian soldier the forgiveness of his sins because it is a holy war and more examples are showing me that they have their own problems and much more division in their church then in our.
Also is ecumenism for them also heresy (what a surprise) cause the body of Christ (the church) can not be divided and to call for union is saying that the body of Christ is divided are their saying.
@@unnukkamlek Sure did read it. Thanks for the reply. Yes, just as certain groups throw out labels to discredit others, such as "racist" or "Nazi", the Orthodox label every Catholic variation in language or understanding as from "heretics" and "devoid of grace" but at the same time interact favorably with Lutherans and other sects who have views far from their own. Yet, when have you heard Catholic bishops or the Pope call Orthodox heretics?
Read the documents of the Orthodox Jerusalem Synod of 1672, called b to refute the heresy of Cyril of Constantinople, formerly Pariarch, who basically became a Calvinist. They argue for a state of purgation, and call the Eucharist the transubstantiated Host, yet now call the terms Purgatory and Transubstantiation, terms used to label a state or process, heresy. When you have little ammunition or proof, labeling others is an easy way of negating the need for logical discourse.
The Catholic Church is willing to discuss and allow for cultural differences in understanding, while the Orthodox are not, and since they cannot offer cogent argument for their positions, calling names works better. After all, no one needs to defend not holding dialogue with racists, Nazis or heretics. Labeling people with whom you disagree horrible things does the job nicely.
Also, remember that popes come and go. A poor pope is not proof of the Catholic Church being untrue, any more than a bad president is proof that the US is not a valid country. As well, a poor Patriarch does not disprove the validity of the Orthodox Church. However, Kiril, a man woth around $5 billion much due to illegal sale of contraband cigarettes, goes too far. No matter, his church is currently in schism with Constantinople and other EO churches. No head means no Church, but a conglomeration of churches headed in different directions.
God Bless, brother.
Father Trenham, I was brought up in Presbyterianism as well, and eventually when I gained enough knowledge of who Calvin, Luther, and all of these people actually were, what they had done, their "version" of the faith, I just couldn't stay. Your channel has helped very much in the disconnection from this protestant Christianity, and this video in particular reminded me very much of my old church.. The words from the pastor of your Presbyterian church, once he heard of your interest in Orthodoxy "If only I was younger" was very hard to hear. Something in those words strikes right into the heart, knowing just how tenuous, what a responsibility it is to be a spiritual father for so many people in his parish, yet he knows it is a sinking ship Calvin had fabricated of the faith, no doubt. It's a shame that culture can lead them so far from the Orthodox faith, it had led me away for 10 long years, and though I acknowledge what heresies the church of Calvin had taught, I had been searching for the Orthodox perspective of the Bible the whole time.. It's a long road.
EO teaches heresies such denying Filioque, and toll houses. No wonder God punished the East to be under the Turks and later communism.
So if you believe a heresy your not saved?
What is heresy? Calvinism
So you equivocate disobedience with the group with disobedience of Christ. Jesus came to the seven churches and said he had something against them. With your teaching the people in those churches would just have to obey the church, and therefore, error Christ. You support collective error. This is why The Catholic church is not the Bride of Christ, she's one of the virgins with the lamp. If you place your hope in her, your oil will run out. But you don't care about this, you just care about political union.
Martin Luther would never have wanted a denomination named after him whereas Calvin probably would have. Luther himself said he would prefer all his works to be destroyed except for his Catechism and his Bible translation into German. Luther probably would have led many people to Orthodoxy if he had lived longer. He was not a willful heretic wanting a following or a name for himself and rebelling against the Church. He should not be labelled a willful heretic and the "leader" of Protestant denominationalism. Many people who are protestant know nothing about Orthodoxy -- we should not call them names or put them all into one pot because many are indeed seeking God and want to live for Him, and He is bringing them to Orthodoxy.
I will always be grateful for Martin Luther's help in my life and many older Protestant authors prior to becoming Orthodox. Many were very godly minded, even tho' they were not Orthodox -- I never followed modern authors while I knew nothing of Orthodoxy.
I have observed, however, that many Orthodox to do not follow the sober ways taught in Orthodoxy; many are just as worldly and material minded as many unbelievers. People dress very casually in church, women often don't wear decent, modest clothes for church or head - coverings; many don't attend regularly or arrive on time, and their understanding of spiritual matters is shallow at best, yet they are considered "okay" because they are Orthodox. Isn't this a type of heresy? Heresy manifests itself in varying ways, doesn't it, not only in doctrine but also in practise?
Nominalists exist everywhere, not just Orthodoxy.
Luther himself was a Nominalist.
Here's the obvious question: how do we know that the faith is actually preserved in catholic/orthodox church? I know Protestant Churches have their issues, but neither Catholic nor Orthodox churches are without their own. On the surface the icons of orthodoxy seem a lot like idols, on the surface the catholic reverence for saints seems a lot like saint worship, and we haven't even gotten to selling indulgences yet. The reformation was a reaction to the corruption of the catholic church. Was there impure motivations involved? Most certainly, we are sinful human beings after all. But the question still remains, how does an individual tell the difference between false and correct teachings? How do we know how to interpret these ancient texts that don't use language even remotely the same way we do? You make it sound so easy to avoid heresy, but it is far from it.
What is "HERESY",.....
I SAY "2024".
YEH????
What specific heresies are you referring to that are found in the Lutheran faith? Lutherans adhere to the word of God. How is that heretical?
I am moving farther and farther from the Evangelical traditions and teachings as they just make very little Greek sense. I am reaching out as I want to belong to The Church of course of Christ but I Am a carful studier and have some questions of Orthodoxy. I know you have traditions that are even considered as holy. I would have little problem with them as long as they don't contradict scripture. I am not like a Calvinist as I know even the bible never calls itself 'undefileable' (probably not a word LoL). I see the salvation message in evangelicalism looking more and more ridiculous the more I study the holy scriptures. I have often told pastors and even bible scholars in my Pentecostal church that they handle salvation like if it were the canvas to a painting their so called 'Romans Road to salvation' is like using a paint roller and ruining the canvas, meaning its sloppy and uncareful. However I do favor Pelagius over 'saint' Augustine's teachings on the 'original sin'. I also don't understand how Orthodoxy still calls leaders 'father' even though Jesus said in Matthew 23:9, 'call no man father'. I sure hope context is not brought up as it seems if Jesus says "don't do X" to anything, context is irrelevant. I side with Orthodoxy on most everything else as I also have the same problems with the Roman Catholic issues that Orthodoxy does.
There's a video on this channel about "call no man father". It's a misunderstanding of low church Protestants.
@@LadyMariaIt’s always a question from Protestants. As you said so low level church.
Don't you think there should be a St.Martin.. the Lutheran..or a Holiday Always a 3 dayer..Lent and the season reason..of about the Son..glory be...
I was view number 666! Yikes! 😂
Repent!
Don't give attention to superstitions.
Matthew 23:9 Do not call anyone on earth your father; for One is your Father, He who is in heaven. One of the biggest heresy that occurred was during the Second Council of Nicaea in AD 787 when the Catholic church required the veneration of icons. Now the veneration of icons is not only a common practice; it is specifically taught by both Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox churches.
Back when they were the same church and had not yet divided from each other, the Second Council of Nicaea mandated the veneration of icons (also called “iconodulia”).
The Second Council of Nicaea (abbreviated as “Nicaea II”) took place in AD 787, decided that anyone who doesn’t venerate icons is to be anathema, or excommunicated from Christ’s church. Here’s what those bishops said:
Therefore all those who dare to think or teach anything different [about icons], or who follow the accursed heretics in rejecting ecclesiastical traditions . . . or who spurn anything entrusted to the church (whether it be the gospel of the figure of the cross or any example of representational art or any martyr’s holy relic), or who fabricate perverted and evil prejudices against cherishing any of the lawful traditions of the catholic church [which at that time included Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox], or who secularize the sacred objects and saintly monasteries, we order that they be suspended if they are bishops or clerics, and excommunicated if they are monks or lay people. . . . If anyone does not accept representation in art of evangelical scenes, let him be anathema. If anyone does not salute such representations as standing for the Lord and his saints, let him be anathema. . . . [T]he false writings composed against the venerable icons, should be given in at the episcopal building in Constantinople, so that they can be put away along with other heretical books. If someone is discovered to be hiding such books, if he is a bishop, priest or deacon, let him be suspended, and if he is a lay person or a monk, let him be excommunicated.1
In substance, the council concludes that icons are so important that, if a Christian doesn’t salute them (e.g., by kissing them or praying to them as to Christ and the saints), that Christian is to be excommunicated. In fact, the council even orders Christians not to own any books that argue against iconodulia. While neither church would be so harsh today, both of them still believe that Nicaea II infallibly teaches the principle that icons should be venerated. Even Orthodox today do not agree...if you talk to an old Russian Orthodox vs what they call the new Orthodox, you will see they don't agree with each other. How many fingers to use when making the cross symbol, which way to walk around the icons (counterclockwise vs clockwise), or even if there should be a bible verse on the back side of the crosses that's worn.
Notice that the council calls iconodulia a tradition of the church. By saying that, the council is claiming that the practice of venerating icons originated with the apostles, and that it has always been an accepted practice in the church. However, the council was simply wrong. History clearly shows that the early church unilaterally rejected the veneration of images for the first centuries following the apostles. In Acts 10:26 Peter lifted him up, saying, “Stand up; I myself am also a man.”
Veneration of images was seen as a difference between Christians and pagans/heretics, first century Christians defended themselves against the charge of not having sacred images, pre-Constantinian Christians directly contradicted veneration of images, No pre-Constantinian Christians described Christian veneration of images at all, and early Church Fathers did Not Venerate Icons.
The Bible strictly forbids idolatry (Leviticus 26:1; Deuteronomy 5:9). God alone deserves to be bowed down to and worshiped. Icons are not intercessors before the throne of grace, and neither are the saints they represent. People in heaven do not have the power to hear our prayers or grant our requests. Only Jesus Christ and the Holy Spirit can intercede for us before the Father (Romans 8:26-27, 34). We should stay as far away as we can from anything that could possibly lead to idolatry.
Jesus was killed for heresy, and christians follow his example by advocating heresy and getting killed for it, usually by some brutal method akin to the cross like burning at the stake.
All Protestantism is not heretical. And not all Eastern Orthodoxy is free of heresy.
Mention which part of Orthodoxy has heresy?
@@voievod9260 idolatry.
@@micahwatz1148 😂😂😂
Thanks for the laugh mr. Protestant.
You have much to learn about the true church (yes, the Orthodox church), but first, leave your pride and arrogance at the door.
Heresy is the choice, the authentic, correct one. How Eve acquired knowledge by listening to the suggestion of the Nahash and Ham was the seed of the great civilizations of Egypt and Mesopotamia, revealing to his brothers the idiocy of his father, and above all the heresy of the master Jesus Christified, who hurled the fire of his indignation not against idolatry but against the Pharisees, followers and architects of the Jewish religious and national restoration, enemies of the Hellenic spirit and worshipers of the perverse and criminal god: "You have stolen the key to knowledge". Luke 11.52. Some monks had understood it, wake up brother.
I'm very intruiged by the Orthodox church. I grew up catholic, fell away for 30 years, was born again 3 years ago. Since then I'm searching for my "spiritual home", my flock, "my" people. There a couple of orthodox priests online I really like, especially Mar Mari Emmanuel or father Spyridon Bailey.
I even visited the only German(speaking)-Orthodox monastery last year and stayed there for a few days.
That being said: I see a LOT wrong with the Orthodox church, and I'm sad about it. Isn't it a heresy, to idolize an organisation of men? To be followers of rules, invented and shaped by the ideas a mere mortals? Rather then a follower of Jesus? A disciple of the most high? I'm very traditional and I like rituals and incense and all of that style - I just can't see it as sound biblical teaching. Nothing like the sacraments are mentioned in the Bible. Not even baptism is of THAT importance, especially not, if you can't decide for yourself. Sacraments and participating in them does not save your soul. That is false unbiblical teaching.
And if you want to argue, that there are more writings, more very wise people, having contributed to how it looks today (and for a long time), then you say, these people are as important as the Apostles. Somehow a John Chistostomos is the same as Paul?
Konstantin made the faith in the Jewish massiah a Roman thing. So Roman paganism merged with messianic Judaism, that's why there are more important people Orthodox and Romans pray to, other then God. Jwes were pushed out of the picture (anti-semitism) É voilá - very similar witchcraft and occultism continued. "You will be assimilated, resistance is futile." That is how the world, the apparatus, the machine, the enemy does it. It's nothing new.
I pretty much gave up looking for some "leader" or "father" (look up if you should call any human that) on the internet or anywhere else outside scripture. It is ONLY that way, I can get the answers God want's you to have. Of course, I need to be honest, challenge myself, question my own believes and motives.
I am in a slightly similar position. I was baptised as an adult from a non- Christisn family. Never confirmed in any church, I was seeking still, and could not find one. Then, after 1 yr of learning to read the bible in Greek ( an all consuming passion that took up my every spare hour during that period, and was my devotion, like a working prayer)led me to Orthodoxy. I found Bisp Ireni’s talks and Fr Josiah on Internet- and heard pure truth everytime. This contrasted with the Church of England falling deeper into obvious error, mirroring a culture what is clearly false, and justifying it. I dare not write more, you can guess what I refer to. Then 1 Cor 11-19 made perfect sense. I visited a ROCOR church, spoke with a wonderful priest. I literally knocked on the door, the chuch was shut. And again it was pure truth, every word he uttered. The correct teaching has been preserved here, all you need do is look at the other churches over the last few years especially to recognise this. When humans interact there will be problems, that is a goven. Yet the Orthodox churches have, even within this limitation, preserved the essence of the faith; eschewing novelty, resisting the temptation to mirror the world. You seem deep and thoughtful, may God lead you to your true home.
Mar Mari is NOT Eastern Orthodox. His Syriac church fell off of the Church back in 5th century. They are Monophysite heretics. Sorry.
Mari Mari Emmanuel is NOT Orthodox! Do not be deceived by him. Listen to Living Orthodox channel with Fr. Michael, he has videos explaining this exact topic. I do love Fr. Spyridon Bailey, Patristic Nectar, Living Orthodox, and Orthodox Ethos channels.
The church isn't an "organization of men". This is a fundamental misunderstanding of what the Bible says the church is. It is the mystical body of Christ Himself. It is not an earthly institution.
Jesus said on this rock I will build my church and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it, and the Holy Spirit will lead her into *all* truths.
Only one church has preserved the faith unchanged and that is orthodoxy.
@@orthodox1717 + Mull Monastery
If you really think you're so correct why not challenge a few Protestant Scholars to a public debate?
I know why you people never have.
You scripturally have nothing to stand on.
The only thing you can do to try to make your man made traditions sound good is to avoid going directly to the Bible to show book chapter and verse why you believe some of the stuff you teach.
You mainly quote someone who lived 1400 years ago yet what he taught is nowhere to be seen in the Bible
You need a Pope for this word. Sorry :)
To reference arch-heretic Pope Benedict (2:03) as some sort of authority on the subject matter of heresies is oxymoron, me thinks...
This guy is terrible at reading a script.... you would think it would be committed to memory 😂😂😂
(The script is down, and to his right... just in case you missed it.. also, pay attention to the fake laughs)
And so what? You think that most youtubers you watch dont have scripts prepared? You think that sermons are not prepared in advance? If you focused on the contents rather than small details, you wouldn't mind
Does that make it any less true?
@@UniteAgainstEvilanother deluded protestant.