You will know the Antichrist by His lawlessness 2Thessalonians 2:6 His deceiving the elect Matthew 24:24 His head wound Revelation 13:3 Brilliance in business Daniel 7:8 His peers bowing before him Revelation 17:13 Exalt himself in words and deeds (Daniel 11:36)
Let's all pray for The Redeemed Zoomer. I hope that one day he sees the error of his ways and that he finally comes to the crucial realization that he needs a new mic. Great chat btw.
@@axxel9626 Unbelievers actually can't have works, they are workers of the lawlessness. (Hebrews 11:6)(Matthew 7:21-23) Good works are not just things that appear good but rather done with the right intention.
@@axxel9626 You're instinct is to support the position of solo fide, which is the correct Biblical view. I think you are missing some of the nuance of how God saves us so that we can do things that glorify him. Look at Ephesians 2:8-10 for a clear Biblical explanation of this. The Epistle of James argues against a dead faith. Sometimes James is misused to support a works based salvation, but the misuse does not negate the proper use. If you have genuine faith in Jesus saving you, your life will show it.
@@oklol7616 james 2 is talking about giving food to the poor, and i saw too many unsaved people giving food to the poor, so yeah, they can do good too now. WE ARE MADE RIGHTEOUS ONLY BY THE BLOOD OF JESUS, NOT BY OUR ACTIONS. Our actions can be good, but they don't justify us, cause we are all workers of lawlessness.
thanks for having this discussion guys! Born again 9 months ago from being a militant atheist and full believer in Darwanism (such a bleak and miserable life I led for so many years with that nihilistic mindset), baptized in water 4 months ago, I have a lot to learn and listening to these discussions among brothers helps me understand the bible, the gospel and more.
and for context I was saved at 23 when I found a bible in my closet, went to matthew chapter 5 and read the whole sermon on the mount and found out I was a guilty sinner, my sins weighed on me for the first time like chains, then later read what Jesus Christ did to save me. Glory to God
you two have been super important to me. RZ got me into Christian content in the first place and Ryan has really helped me through many questions. So glad you guys Collab I would love if you guys do a part 2 at some time.
Hey Ryan, I already believed all that you're teaching, but watching your videos has really helped me sharpen my evangelism approach and given me words to say what I already believed. Thanks so much for your content.
@NeedGodnet I'm 100% sure children go to heaven (I believe in the same things you believe by the way. When itncoems to faith alone and basically everything). Based on these verses, which I know can be interpreted another way to say they aren't proof kids go to heaven but I think do have implication of that. 2 Samuel 12:23 ESV But now he is dead. Why should I fast? Can I bring him back again? I shall go to him, but he will not return to me." Matthew 19:14 ESV but Jesus said, "Let the little children come to me and do not hinder them, for to such belongs the kingdom of heaven." Deuteronomy 1:39 ESV And as for your little ones, who you said would become a prey, and your children, who today have no knowledge of good or evil, they shall go in there. And to them I will give it, and they shall possess it. God bless and much love ❤️✝️
@@TheTruthsetsyoufree-j5s Work doesn't justify you. It's a result of you faith. You're justified by faith. Read the whole chapter, start from the first verse. James was talking to partial Christians that claim to be Christians, yet are hypocrites.
Thank you Ryan for standing firm on what faith in Jesus means, the only doctrine we all absolutely must get right. And for speaking truth in love. God bless brother.
So this guy thinks that roughly 56% of Christians I.e, Catholics and Orthodox are going to hell purely based off of his singular interpretation of the Bible. Absolutely wild!
@@PaperBagGambles Apparently as narrow as independent Protestants want to make... Even if its at the cost of separating itself from any sense of Church history, historical texts, or church tradition. Exactly what Bible would the Protestants have to come to these conclusions without the institutions of the Catholic and Orthodox churches?
I was from a more Baptist point of view for a long time and redeemed zoomed really convinced me hard this and other videos I’ve seen now, but this one was really thought provoking
@@HellenicPapistas a catholic I don’t think they believe that dead faith alone justifies. They believe that faith which works through love justifies. Just like us catholic believe in that.
@@Jk-ow8ny I know exactly what you mean with that, but technically on a theological and scriptural basis, it can lead to error or worse: intellectual faith alone.
@@HellenicPapistnobody is arguing that “intellectual” faith justifies. True faith contains good works and a desire to be obedient, but those things don’t merit salvation they prove that faith is genuine.
@@Austin-wu8mx You’d be surprised by the amount of evangelicals that believe you only need to “intellectually”(they don’t use that term, because they think believing He’s Lord is obeying) and/or trust Him alone, that you don’t need to show works at all.
Gentlemen, I'd like to say this has been a great conversation to listen to. Ryan, thanks for your continuous help in opening up my understanding to scripture. I really appreciate your tone and delivery on your discussions. Jesus is Lord🙏
@@TheTruthsetsyoufree-j5s In the context of the passage James is addressing outward justification, as in your good works demonstrate (are the fruits of) your faith. Paul uses the same example of Abraham in romans, I suggest you examine both passages with intellectual honesty and you will see we are justified in God's eyes by faith
If Faith Alone means no participation takes place in salvation then is repentance not necessary for salvation? What about Paul’s warnings to the Corinthians about sins that excommunicate them from the kingdom of God? Why would Paul warn of sins to an established church that would largely have already accepted Christ if there should be no fear of losing salvation?
Simple because everyone ignores the passages that suit them 🤷🏽♂️ Catholics, Protestants etc… whoever will do his will.. will know the doctrine. John 7:17… anyone who will not DO the sayings of Christ is as a man who builds his house on sand..Matthew 7:26. Most don’t want to do Gods will.. they avoid dying to self which is what the gospel calls for. Whether that mean having faith in God and not tradition, or believing that when the Bible warns us about returning to sin it’s for a reason.
I love both your channels! Is both of your channels offers good content relevant for people who are so confused in their doctrines as well as people who never have looked further than their church doctrines. I Thank God for both of you. God bless you always. Keep it going!
Very good conversation guys, I love when two believers collab. This was very cool to watch. Believe in the Lord Jesus Christ and you will be saved. Continue to walk in love and walk in Christ, rightly dividing the Word of God.
Great conversation. Re the sacraments, they are not a work (ie something you do) so much as something you receive (desire to identify with Christs sacrifice), baptism once, communion over and over again
On the question of someone having an understanding intellectually, then falling away. I married a man who was in seminary, he started using drugs, eventually abandoned me, and our son… he got another woman pregnant, they’ve since had the baby, and they are engaged, all while he and I are still currently married. He claims God blessed him with this woman, and baby to love and protect, all while abandoning the family God truly blessed him with. So yes. There is knowledge, but no heart change. He is worse than an infidel.
Reformed Baptist here (1689 London Baptist Confession). I embrace reformed theology but I do not believe in the Presbyterian view of Baptism and especially the infant baptism. Salvation is by faith alone and baptism is just a public declaration of identifying with Christ's death, burial, and resurrection or the public profession of faith. It is not something that saves you. But if you are saved, you should want to obey Christ and be baptized.
I think you're position is reasonable given your understanding of baptism, but those who affirm infant baptism don't think it's just an outward proclaimation, they tie it with being cleansed from original sin and the focus is less on them as an individual, but more of a symbol of being brought into a new family, hense the obvious comparison with circumcision in the old covenant. There's also the fact that as far as I know all of Christendom has practiced infant baptism until relatively recently, and right now Catholic, Orthodox, and major Protestant denominations affirm it. How do you deal with these points?
@@joshuasy10I think this topic is far more complex than many people realize. Prior to Augustine, it seems that Baptism had vast variety in terms of practice and theology. It's interesting to note that there are numerous early Church fathers who were born to Christian families that were not baptized as infants. Gregory of Nazianzus, Basil the Great, and John Chrysostom to name a few. On the other end we also have Hippolytus who mentions baptizing children and those who cannot speak for themselves, most likely referring to infants.
The Baptist idea of baptism being a public declaration is in my opinion partly true. Baptism is best done publicly, but if that’s all it is, you don’t see the apostles going out of their way to make it public. Many of the recorded baptisms are done in relatively private settings. They didn’t wait to get in front of the church body to do it. Instead, baptism should be thought of as the sign of entry to the new covenant. Circumcision was the sign of entry into the old covenant, baptism the sign of the new. Incidentally, if you study how the Old Testament and New Testament refer to circumcision, it was a sign that largely referred to the same spiritual reality as baptism. Yet, the sign given as a seal of righteousness by faith that Abraham had before he was circumcised was also given to his household. The members of his household were given the sign that signified faith, even at 8 days old. Things the line of thinking that led the reformers to accept infant baptism. God redeclares children of believers as covenantally set apart or holy in 1 Cor. 7, so they should receive the sign of the covenant, and the parents should disciple their children from day 1 as believers, praying for fruit and repentance for their children.
Zoomer is correct here. We are not saved by perfect understanding and assent to correct abstract doctrines but by trust in the living God. Also, while justification is by grace through faith alone, it necessarily leads to sanctification and true obedience, in which we are very, very active. Sanctification is absolutely necessary, and utterly non-meritorious.
@@NomosCharis Mathew 5:18. The law shall not pass till heaven and earth pass away. Did heaven and earth pass away? Roman’s 3:31 yea we establish the law
@@NomosCharis if the law is how we recognize sin. If the law is gone then there is no such thing as sin. So then how can you be obedient and how could you be damned?
Great to think on, I think underplaying works as a necessary outworking of true saving faith is a disservice to Gods will for us. I sometimes get that from these conversations.
I enjoy this channel immensely and the views shared help me with areas where I am not fully developed. Having said that, I would love to see a discussion between you and FR Stephen De Young. Please invite him to a discussion at soonest opportunity:)
It was not done w/ the intention of being a work or law abidance unto salvation, & may not have even been of your own volition (i.e. you may have been a baby), so God willing it is perfectly understood, He knows everything after all.
It's not sinful to get circumcised, Paul even got Timothy circumcised to not cause offence to the Jews (Acts 16:3). It's only wrong and will exclude you from heaven if you think it is required to do to go to heaven. Just like it also would if you think any other works are required as well, whether it be baptism, giving, church-going, fasting, etc.
Zoomer is an excellent conversationalist. And I love how even though he concedes that your points are correct he articulates the viewpoint of how of someone who does have faith in Christ and does works at the same time might see it
Christ literally commanded baptism and linked it directly to salvation. “He that believeth AND IS BAPTIZED shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.” Mark 16:16
@@St.MosestheBlackNo, most scholars will recognise that only the first 8 verses are in the earliest manuscripts. Cite 1 church father in the 1st century that cited Mark 16:16(Or any other verse after Mark 16:8 after Mark chapter 16)
@@oklol7616 “Since Jesus died for everyone, believers and unbelievers, it is evident that not only belief but also baptism is required. For Jesus said, 'He who believes and is baptized shall be saved, but he who does not believe shall be condemned.' Belief alone is not sufficient, but the confession of that belief in baptism is also necessary.” - Origen (c. 184-253 AD) “He that believes and is baptized shall be saved; but he that does not believe shall be condemned.’ Yet this condemnation comes not from the mere non-believing, but from the rejection of the truth when it has been offered. Therefore, baptism is a means of accepting Christ, and rejection of baptism signifies rejection of Him.”- St. John Chrysostom (c. 349-407 AD) “When the Savior says, ‘He that believes and is baptized shall be saved,’ He does not mean that the water is more powerful than the Spirit, but that the water serves as a symbol and the Spirit sanctifies. Faith alone is dead without the works; and thus, baptism, which follows upon faith, is necessary for salvation.” - St. Cyril of Jerusalem (c. 313-386 AD) “You have read, therefore, that the three witnesses in baptism, which bear testimony on earth, are one: the water, the blood, and the Spirit, and they bear witness to the salvation of our souls. And this is what is signified in the words of the Lord: 'He that believes and is baptized shall be saved.'” - St. Ambrose of Milan (c. 340-397 AD) “We are persuaded that no one can be saved without baptism; for the words of Christ are clear: ‘He who believes and is baptized shall be saved.’ The water of baptism brings the Spirit, and the Spirit brings life. This is why our Lord connects salvation not just to belief, but to the sacrament of baptism.” - St. Gregory Nazianzus (c. 329-390 AD)
You should talk to Jordan Cooper or Bryan Wolfmueller about Baptism vs Faith. Both Lutherans. They do a great job talking about the Lutheran view of how both are compatible!
Redeemed zoomer was very respectful. However, to be converted by opinions of man is concerning. I would encourage a personal spiritual experience to confirm a truth, not an opinion or interpretation of man. I also can't believe how many people just pick and choose what scriptures are important.... do we cut out the book of James? It says "faith without works is dead"... is he wrong?.... isn't faith a work? This doesn't lessen what the saviour did for us, though. The atonement works whether we are good or not, but surely works directed by your faith could be a better way of living? It God didn't create the world (a work), but nothing could go forward. In regards to the circumcisions issue, both can be saved. Circumcision isn't a saving ordinance. Baptism is, though (and baptism is a work, something we have been asked to do, to work towards living with God). This also shows some will be saved and not live with God. Sounds like many mansions? Sounds like more than one kingdom of glory?
Great Collab Ryan and Richard 🔥 waiting for Gavin collab and please continue focusing on Catholicism because very little Christians focuses on them since they are more focused in Church History than the Gospel.
And the Pentecostals ignore Church history and supplant the gospel with later restorationist views. Church history is our history. We Protestant greatly err in thinking that church history is Roman Catholic history.
Great conversation. The Bible says that it’s our iniquities separate us from God (Is 59:2) not necessarily our sinful-nature which we inherited from Adam. Newborns are completely innocent of any iniquity, therefore they are not separated from God, therefore they do go to heaven if they were to die.
I think point is, do we need it in order to be saved? It seems u do it to show to men that u are in Christ. It's not sth u present b4 God to be added to complete ur salvation. Like, God demonstrating redemption to Cornelius even without being baptized. Peter commanding their baptism was not what granted them redemption b4 the Lord, but already possessed it far b4 the baptism. It's Jesus commanding us to spread the good news. I don't believe if u don't spread the Gospel u will goto hell.
Assurance is vital and 1 John is largely addressing it. I wish I had been taught the scriptures which could assure m way back when I first came to faith. I did eventually read all the hard perseverance passages on perseverance and the wonderful assurance passages too. Praise God I am saved and I understand why.
I’ve never heard so many misrepresentations of what Catholics believe in such a short time. Initial justification is not merited by faith OR works, soley Gods grace.
@@jhedjoardumago7691the sacraments are visible signs of inward grace. So by definition, they are the normative vehicles in which God uses to give us grace. It’s not something we “do” as a work but something received from God.
Again, after watching another video from these guys, I'm certain that being Catholic is a blessing I can never thank God enough for. I actually feel bad for protestants. It's ironic hearing their arguments against the Catholic/Orthodox church and other Protestants.
Bowing down and praying to a statue of Mary is breaking commandment number 2. Oh that’s right, Catholicism decided to remove commandment number 2 relating to idolatry…. Jesus said to call no man father on earth because you have one Father in heaven… Uh… this is embarrassing..
@@HeSavedMethe 10 commandments don’t have a number in front of them in the Bible. There are many ways to regroup them to make them 10. The Jews have their way. The early Christian Church another. Protestants another. All are legitimate. There’s nothing to hide: the commandments are all there in full in Exodus and Deuteronomy. “For I became *your father* in Christ Jesus through the gospel” (1 Cor 4:15) I guess Paul hadn’t got the memo 🤦🏻 You brought up probably the two most ridiculous objections to Catholicism. It’s fine. You still have a long journey back home. I’ll pray for you. God bless you.
@@HeSavedMe No, a bow is not worship, and nothing was removed from Exodus chapter 20 in the Catholic Bible if you bothered to read it. But continue to lie about us and continue your slander. It will go well for you.
I don't think Orthodoxy and Roman Catholicism should be spoken of in correlation. There is a lot shared but also a lot more that separates us as denominations. I do agree though, this video seemed more of like a glaze fest between two guys who's beliefs correlate pretty much completely rather than a discussion that makes you interested.
I’ve heard about the Trust in Christ terminology before. I love it. I have even heard of a trust in Christ leading to confidence. Confidence in Christ baby! He is the Savior of all who hearten to his words!
As a Catholic, I don’t understand how someone can use the example of Paul talking against circumcision as a reason to say we don’t need baptism. Yes if you think you need circumcision, Christ is of no use to you BECAUSE circumcision was the requirement of the old covenant, and we are not in the old covenant anymore. Paul also says that baptism replaces circumcision. If circumcision saves you in the old covenant, he seems like he thinks baptism saves you in the new covenant. Peter even says “baptism now saves you”
It's frustrating listening to NeedGod. He misrepresents the Catholic position and when corrected, he still misrepresents it. He thinks the Catholic Church teaches a false Gospel while literally preaching a false Gospel of Once Saved Always Saved.
@ needGod net. Would you be willing to have a conversation about Catholic justification compared to the Protestant view? I personally don't think they are different as people think.
What is your point with ephesians? That we are saved( united to Christ) by grace through faith and not by works? Catholics believe the same thing@@axxel9626
@@Emmanuel_EEE i got like 60 verses representing the Gospel. The Gospel is so easy, Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and you'll be saved for eternity. It's not rocket science. And i ain't protestant
A good work is not from us or of us. It is all God that does the work through us. The work on our part is to obey and allow Him to do His will. We use our free will accordingly and righteously by accepting and allowing Him
From looking into Ephesians 2:8-10 this is the understanding I get from it. This is how the 3 verses make sense to me. I would love to get your thoughts on it. Salvation is by the grace of God which is a gift, we receive this gift by faith We can’t say it is by our own doing by working for it because God already made us to do good works. Like a fish can’t boast about swimming and a bird cant about flying, we can’t boast about what we were made to do. Real faith is therefore a working faith because we can’t say we have faith in Christ and not do what he made us for. However this working faith alone still does not mean we are saved as we still sin and we are born into a fallen world. Salvation is ultimately then by the grace of God, we get this by having faith and we have faith by doing the good works we were created for. I also looked into the direct disciples of the apostles, Ignatius, Polycarp and Clement of Rome all wrote about faith in a similar way. That faith goes hand in hand with work works. Regardless I’d love your thoughts on the way I’ve understood the passage in Ephesians
I'm a catechumen in the Orthodox Church. And I enjoyed this dialogue even though I disagreed with most of it. Salvation - you need faith in Christ but this includes good works. Christ said those who love me keep my commandments. The epistle of James says faith without works is dead. Many times in the scriptures when Paul is talking about works he's referring to the law of Moses and the traditions within the old covenant. Cooperating with God's Grace by being faithful and obediance to Jesus that is what saves. Paul says to work out our salvation with fear and trembling. To claim we have complete insurance of our salvation is false. We know we can fall away which is why we need to spend our entire life in faithfulness and obediance. Baptism - this is necessary for salvation. There's so many overwhelming bible passages that support this and the writings of the church fathers. Sacraments - Jesus himself said that those who do not eat my body and drink my blood have no life in them. The sacraments are the means of grace. The church is the body of Christ and the priests are those who are ordained to administer the sacraments. The priests represent the Apostles who represent Christ this can be seen when Christ gives the keys of the kingdom to Peter and the laying on of hands to confer the priesthood. Rejecting the institution that Christ established is not trusting and putting your faith in Christ himself. He said that the gates of hades would not prevail against his church. The idea that more than 1500 years later people would come along and rewrite the theologies of Historic Christianity goes against the entire mission of Christ.
It is very clear that we are not saved by works. The only way around that is to try to redefine things that we do in order to be saved as "not actually works" which is clearly corrupted and wrong.
How can you know you are presently saved if the possibility exists in the future for you to go apostate in which case your position condemns you as never being saved to begin with? Without exhaustive foreknowledge of a settled future it’s impossible to know if someone is presently saved under the OSAS/Perseverance of the Saints positions.
Baptism concept is purification that also linked to the jewish purification ceremony of engagement between bridegroom and the bride, after the ceremony they wear white dress as symbol of holiness that is also linked to the wedding garment mentioned in matthew 22. Also Jesus’s last message was to make disciples and baptize people in the name of the Father, the Son and Holy Spirit. A lot of progress Christianity keeps circumcising Jesus’ teachings.
I think the problem is the definition of work. I find it funnny that in galatians paul says baptism is not a work, Galatians 3:26-27 ESV [26] for in Christ Jesus you are all sons of God, through faith. [27] For as many of you as were baptized into Christ have put on Christ. I think this is rather clear, baptisk is not our work, but God's, now obviously if someone believes they sre saved by their baptism then they arent trusting in christ, but what abous someone who believes there baptism, saved them and was efficacious unto salvation, because of their faith. Meaning that they received salvation in baptism by faith
@@jhedjoardumago7691 the problem is, the bible used the language "baptism now saves you" so whatever that means, it does me that we are able to say baptism now saves. So because the bible says "baptism saves", I say, "baptism saves". Now what does that mean? I agree with redeemed zoomer, it is the distinction between sign and thing signifed which can properly be spoken of as one sacrament
@@jhedjoardumago7691 1 peter 3:21 (baptism which corresponds to this now saves you, not as a removal of dirt from the flesh but as an appeal to God through a good conscience). What that verse means can be debated, but either way, we can say baptism saves, because the bible says baptism saves.
@@jhedjoardumago7691 sure, we can include that there. It's not my point. My point is that the bible says baptism saves, there I will say baptism saves.
this was like watching a young john Macarthur talking to a young RC Sproul. Both of whom I have High regards. Thay may be reformed in both teachings but they're both different when it comes to baptism.
disagreements and discussions don't negate from the fact that only the Bible is an infallible authority. you have countless disagreements throughout members of the RCC and orthodox churches. just because there's a higher authority doesn't mean what they're declaring as true/infallible is correct.
@---bl2uj The disagreements in the apostolic churches are not on the basics. It''s on other things like the hypostatic union, iconoclasm, purgatory, Marian doctrine. Protestants can't agree on anything.
@@Sinha010 that's completely false. protestants have a lot more unity than you think on salvific issues and we acknowledge that the Church is a living organism of believers everywhere not just in our institutions. also i feel like the issues you mentioned are pretty big ones lol
@@---bl2ujThe problem is is that we have different bibles. There was also several hundred years of debate on the canon of scripture in the early church. Protestants took books out of the canon and therefore can’t consistently hold to sola scriptura. The Church and its councils are the authority because they’re the tradition that Christ established. He never gave you a Bible but a Church.
@---bl2uj It's not false. As you can see on this video, they can't agree on baptismal regeneration, and that has been resolved since the apostles. Baptism saves. You can have on the same block a fundamentalist Baptist, church, a Reformed Baptist church, a Presbyterian church and a Prosperity Church and they will all doubt the others' salvation
I loved this. Although I am interested to know how you both would respond to verses catholics tend to bring up like James 2:17 that talk about faith without works being dead. Wanted to hear if there were any differing opinions between you two
Every passage these two commentators go to in St Paul's corpus they both assume the word meaning associated with their denomination and a version of atonement theory associated with faith and justification excluding works. Presumably the Protestant Christian assumes a form of penal substitution theory which requires the instrumentality of faith. Where does the bible and/or tradition teach faith is an instrument when there is no evidence Abraham's faith was an instrument? The bible never teaches faith is an instrument of justification. Why believe faith is an instrument and man is justified by faith alone when no text says a man is justified by faith alone? Why believe faith apart from works of the law means faith alone when hope saves and faith without love is worthless?
“Though I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, but have not love, I have become sounding brass or a clanging cymbal. And though I have the gift of prophecy, and understand all mysteries and all knowledge, and though I have all faith, so that I could remove mountains, but have not love, I am nothing. And though I bestow all my goods to feed the poor, and though I give my body to be burned, but have not love, it profits me nothing.”
@@bjornlarsen7440 The typical faith and works argument ignores the context of St Pauls letters and additional information given in other letters, the gospels and church history. Faith alone requires sophistic argumentation presuming faith alone is a fictional truth claim.
@@MrJohnmartin2009 I agree brother you can have faith that moves mountains but without love you are nothing. Faith has to produce love for God and fellow man. Without that faith is dead.
@@bjornlarsen7440 Justification is through an interior regeneration associated with faith, hope and love presumed in Abraham's life contrary to the Prot alien righteousness and an extrinsic imputation of Jesus righteosuness.
Loved this! Ryan can you please make a video about where the Presbyterian faith differs than what the bible teaches (if it does)? I was born a Presbyterian myself, but I identify as Christian only. God bless you always❤
Presbyterianism is very biblical! It does not differ from what the bible teaches. Stay Presbyterian as it is a historical reformed denomination with lots of resources to help you in your faith. Read the Westminster confession for a view of what presbyterians believe and why!
When they talk about by faith alone quoting Matthew... I'm baffled how they completely skipped the first part of the text which reads “Not everyone who says to Me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ shall enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father in heaven. When separated, you can make the case either you need faith only, or works only. Taken together, Jesus is making the case that you need both faith & work. Faith alone can lie, Work alone will die.
Typical Protestants standing on their own man made Protestant doctrines. God's church did not fail and become apostate, as Presbyterian and non-denom Christians declare. There is a major misconception in Protestantism when the Bible says that following the Law cannot save you, when every Epistle is referring to the Law of Moses, which was a major dispute in Early Christianity because the former Jews-turned-Christian were telling Christians you still needed to follow the Law of Moses, and many of the Epistles were authoritatively stating that you are not to follow the Law of Moses anymore. But the truth is that you must have faith and follow the Law of Jesus, if you want to have any chance of entering the Kingdom of God. In Protestantism, you can do whatever you want, but as long as you "believe", you will be saved, is a false gospel and a damnable, novel teaching created in the 1600s.
Cannot part of that Will be accepting that Jesus is the only way to salvation, and that it is not by OUR good works will bring us closer or farther to the kingdom of Heaven, but only through our faith in His (Jesus’s) good work? Because I guess from my perspective if I am required to perform something to save myself, then I do play a part in my salvation. So who saved me? Me + Jesus, which is not just Jesus. I did my part, and he did his part, but both parts were required. We share credit in getting me to heaven. This versus Him taking all the credit, He has paid the debt, I realize I am a sinner deserving of hell in need of rescue, I put my faith in His power at the cross that I do not deserve, then out of completely overwhelming love and gratitude towards Him and what He’s done I do good works which are never out of fear that if I refuse (which I wouldn’t, hypothetically, if I want to love and serve Jesus well!) to do them I’ll go to hell. What do you think of this? I feel like our ideas on it are very close, but not exactly the same.
@@nervousdorito3696 you must cooperate with God's grace to be saved. If you sin after being born again, you must repent, and if you don't repent of very major sins, your salvation is lost. You cannot keep sinning and expect to enter the kingdom of God.
@@David-we3sb We will sin for the rest of our lives because we are sinners, it is inevitable. All sin is deadly and hurts God, but by the power of the Holy Spirit we will also continue to be sanctified; recognizing our sin, being convicted of it, and rejecting it as we come to better know God and His Will. I think this language of cooperate is difficult because if I CO-OPERATE with anyone, including God, we are operating together as distinct entities and thus I get part credit- this versus me accepting and putting my faith in Jesus and realizing that in my sinful nature I can’t do anything on my own, but am in desperate need of the Holy Spirit to purify my desires and point them towards God. It’s not an attitude, though, of, ‘Well if God doesn’t want to me do this, he’ll make me stop.’ We ARE able to know God’s feelings towards sin, and if we love God and have the Holy Spirit working in us we will begin to see our sin, hate it, and resist it; thus His desires overtaking and replacing our desires, not by my power but His own. Another question if I could ask, does Catholicism believe that any and all sin is deserving of hell, or certain kinds (for believers)? I think someone told me one time, but I don’t think I fully understood. If I could add another example too. I would say when I accepted Jesus, my sin became ‘worse’ before it got better- but God was using that to reveal to me how depraved I really was. Was I going to hell at that point in time, or did God know I was going to commit those further sins and cover that sin on the cross knowing that I was His child in the midst of being sanctified (as I still am being sanctified), and in his radical love did not abandon or forsake me, but continued to work in me? Because I guess again from my perspective, if I had been separated from God at that point, I would not have had any further conviction towards my sin, but I did because He was in me working. No fear of hell ever motivated me away from sin, because I didn’t believe I could be separated from Him, but a complete awestruck gratitude towards my Creator for saving me, not because of what I would or could or would not do for Him, but out of love for me. If He did that for me, how could I keep sinning against Him? Additionally I wish to do good works now, not because if I don’t I’m guilty of sinning against Him, but because I can bring more glory to the God who saved me when He didn’t have to. What do you think about that, or what do you think the Catholic position would probably be?
@@David-we3sbJohn 6:40 For this is the will of my Father, that everyone who looks on the Son and believes in him should have eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day."
My dad, who was raised a Catholic and converted to Christianity as an adult. He would ask his catholic family or friends if the pope said something that contradicted the Bible who would they believe the Bible or the Pope? Their answer was how he could tell if they were saved or not.
That was amazing! I actually unfollowed Redeemed Zoomer a while ago because of his defense of catholicism/orthodoxy, but with this conversation now it does seem like he is a well intentioned christian. I'm glad he seems to be realizing the dangers of these false gospels, although it kinda seems like he is still too in their defense, i don't know... We'll see how it goes from now. I'm super happy that Ryan is getting more recognition as a great online evangelizer and a force from good in the Kingdom of God! Redeemed Zoomer seems to be very knowledgeable about theology and he produces some good content, which would definitely be way better if he spent less time defending these idolatrous cults. But either way, God bless you both! Amazing to see such an in depth conversation about theology from two very smart and wise christians! 🥰🙏🏻💙🙌🏻✝️
@@Hendrix_ why such difficulty in relying completely on Jesus? They oppose false gospel, that's not hatred for orthodoxy but rather love for the ones still not believing the gospel.
@@phetmoz Maybe listening to the bible and praying for them instead of publicly denouncing their faith would be more Christ-like. Excommunicating/blocking out other Christians for their interpretation of the Bible isn't something we should do, we need to have conversations like NeedGod had with Kyle the other week, not push away people because they are of a different perspective.
@@Hendrix_ While listening to the Bible and praying for others are important, we must also remember that Jesus and the apostles frequently called out false teachings and corrected misunderstandings of the faith. Publicly denouncing false doctrines is not about pushing people away, but about protecting the integrity of the gospel and guiding professed believers towards the truth. When Paul confronted Peter in Galatians 2, he did so publicly for the sake of the community's understanding. Similarly, excommunicating or blocking out individuals who persistently spread harmful interpretations can be necessary to preserve the health of the church. The orthodox & Catholic church are behemoths of false doctrine. Dialogue is important, but so is maintaining the purity of the message we share.
From the Catholic perspective, receiving the sacraments is no more a “work” than intellectually assenting to or trusting in God. I like to think of grace as a bulletproof vest that God places on us. We don’t choose to put it on, and have no merit in being saved from death by the incoming bullet of sin, but we can choose to take it off and deny the gift that was given to us. We don’t freely choose or merit grace, but we can reject it. The grace from sacraments aren’t earned by us, but participating in them is simply not rejecting His gift
We’re not gonna talk about Calvinism? I almost left the faith based on Calvinism. It’s so false. Yes, there are some scripture that seems like it could support it, but it doesn’t. I believe that’s more important than talking about Catholics in this video. For example though, in the beginning he asked the guy “how do you get to heaven” (roughly), and the guy said “through Jesus alone, putting faith in what He did”. That’s a contradiction, if God chose you, it doesn’t matter if you put faith in Him or not, He chose you right? I just believe the Calvinism view takes out free will. It hurts my brain to even think about it. I dug deep on it a few months ago and found myself in a hole. Jesus pulled me out of that hole
I agree with you against calvinism. Ultimately, if God chose some and rejected others, God would have to ensure this by being in complete control of our actions. The mystery of calvinism is god makes us sin, and punishes us for it.
@@isaaccampos2393 100%. There are always two sides of the coin. If God chooses for someone to be saved, then God also chooses for someone to not be saved. That’s evil in my eyes. It would be limited free will almost.
I haven't watched the whole video, but I was a bit worried when Ryan said he agreed with regeneration before faith. I wonder if he's a reformed baptist(if he believes in tulip)
@@crazydogdog2831 God is under no obligation to save anyone. He can show mercy to whomever He wants and show His justice to whomever He wants. That doesn't make Him evil.
At 28:23 he says that works are physical action and faith is not a work because it is simply trust. But I think this is counter to what scripture teaches. The reason faith isn’t a work is not because it isn’t physical. It’s because it is a gift from God. Otherwise you’d be able to boast about it. That would indicate it could be considered a work if it weren’t a gift. Ephesians 2:8-9 (HCSB): 8 For you are saved by grace through faith, and this is not from yourselves; it is God’s gift- 9 not from works, so that no one can boast. It’s the same idea in Romans. It’s not physical or mental activity in man that is essential, but the action of God on the behalf of his “vessels of mercy”. Romans 9:16 (HCSB): 16 So then it does not depend on human will or effort but on God who shows mercy.
You could also say whoever believes AND sins will be saved. Because you BELIEVE, you will be saved no matter what follows. Was the thief on the cross baptized with water? No. Baptism also refers to being baptized by the Holy Spirit. Lastly, the ending of Mark is not in the earliest manuscripts. Should you get baptized? Yes. When I was saved I had an overwhelming urge and desire to be baptized and do good works but I know I was saved before water baptism. Thinking you need anything else to be saved other than faith in Jesus is saying you don’t believe Jesus is enough.
@@jettruth No, it's saying I believe Jesus was telling the truth when He said those who believe AND are baptized will be saved. I don't think we should ignore Jesus's words. We should believe Him and not do mental gymnastics to say "baptism" doesn't REALLY mean "baptism". That's what Satan did in the Garden of Eden, "Did God REALLY say...?" Jesus said it. We should believe it even if it doesn't line up with our current theology.
@@TJMcCarty And in act at some point gentiles receive the Holy Spirit and are saved only by believing the Gospel, without WATER BAPTISM, maybe instead of taking every scripture to yourself, study and see that there is clear transition of how God work with people, the Bible does tell us to rightly DIVIDE the word of truth for a reason, or else you should probably go and build an ark.
1:This verse is not in the earliest manuscripts, so it is dangerous to base your doctrine off this. 2: It says in the following passage that whoever doesn’t believe is condemned rather than those who aren’t baptised are condemned.
It’s nice that Zoomer was respectful and actually listening and not trying to talk over Ryan to prove a point🙏🏻 it was a good chat
They agree on a lot of things✝. Especially the true gospel. Plus RZ is a truly kind hearted individual🙏
I was shocked he said Catholics are not saved…. He’s really changed since those early days.
You will know the Antichrist by
His lawlessness 2Thessalonians 2:6
His deceiving the elect Matthew 24:24
His head wound Revelation 13:3
Brilliance in business Daniel 7:8
His peers bowing before him Revelation 17:13
Exalt himself in words and deeds (Daniel 11:36)
@@DanielLindsay-z3w (random agnostic) “That must mean Donald Trump is the Antichrist.”
@@Jerome616in one point they say they can’t judge but they judge the Catholic and those who believe in other ways
Let's all pray for The Redeemed Zoomer. I hope that one day he sees the error of his ways and that he finally comes to the crucial realization that he needs a new mic. Great chat btw.
fr 🙏
They had us in the first half
underrated comment fr
Kkkkk
I love how This isn’t like a debate nobody is trying to win it’s just a conversation between two Christian’s💪
Iron sharpening iron! ✝️ ⚔️✝️
EXACTLY i loved this.
WAS NOT EXPECTING THIS COLLAB!! 🔥
Right?! Fantastic!!!!
Seemed like more of an interrogation than a collab. A gentle, kind hearted one at that, but didn't seem much like a colab.
Seeing men younger than me articulating the faith so clearly is encouraging.
@@TheTruthsetsyoufree-j5s Of course. Good works are the fruit of genuine faith in the saving work of Christ.
@@caleschnell sorry? 2 Timothy 2:13. John 10:28. John 4:13-14.
Salvation cannot be lost, NEVER.
Study the Bible man.
@@axxel9626 Unbelievers actually can't have works, they are workers of the lawlessness. (Hebrews 11:6)(Matthew 7:21-23) Good works are not just things that appear good but rather done with the right intention.
@@axxel9626 You're instinct is to support the position of solo fide, which is the correct Biblical view. I think you are missing some of the nuance of how God saves us so that we can do things that glorify him. Look at Ephesians 2:8-10 for a clear Biblical explanation of this. The Epistle of James argues against a dead faith. Sometimes James is misused to support a works based salvation, but the misuse does not negate the proper use. If you have genuine faith in Jesus saving you, your life will show it.
@@oklol7616 james 2 is talking about giving food to the poor, and i saw too many unsaved people giving food to the poor, so yeah, they can do good too
now. WE ARE MADE RIGHTEOUS ONLY BY THE BLOOD OF JESUS, NOT BY OUR ACTIONS. Our actions can be good, but they don't justify us, cause we are all workers of lawlessness.
thanks for having this discussion guys! Born again 9 months ago from being a militant atheist and full believer in Darwanism (such a bleak and miserable life I led for so many years with that nihilistic mindset), baptized in water 4 months ago, I have a lot to learn and listening to these discussions among brothers helps me understand the bible, the gospel and more.
and for context I was saved at 23 when I found a bible in my closet, went to matthew chapter 5 and read the whole sermon on the mount and found out I was a guilty sinner, my sins weighed on me for the first time like chains, then later read what Jesus Christ did to save me. Glory to God
Praise God!!
@@JesusSavedMySoul11284just saying believing in evolution is contrary to being Christian, redeemed zoomer actually believes in evolution
you two have been super important to me. RZ got me into Christian content in the first place and Ryan has really helped me through many questions. So glad you guys Collab I would love if you guys do a part 2 at some time.
I wasn’t expecting this collab! Very interesting
Hey Ryan, I already believed all that you're teaching, but watching your videos has really helped me sharpen my evangelism approach and given me words to say what I already believed. Thanks so much for your content.
So glad to hear that! Glory to God
@NeedGodnet I'm 100% sure children go to heaven (I believe in the same things you believe by the way. When itncoems to faith alone and basically everything). Based on these verses, which I know can be interpreted another way to say they aren't proof kids go to heaven but I think do have implication of that.
2 Samuel 12:23 ESV
But now he is dead. Why should I fast? Can I bring him back again? I shall go to him, but he will not return to me."
Matthew 19:14 ESV
but Jesus said, "Let the little children come to me and do not hinder them, for to such belongs the kingdom of heaven."
Deuteronomy 1:39 ESV
And as for your little ones, who you said would become a prey, and your children, who today have no knowledge of good or evil, they shall go in there. And to them I will give it, and they shall possess it.
God bless and much love ❤️✝️
Yo' this Collab is awesome! God bless you guys✝️❤️
@@TheTruthsetsyoufree-j5s Work doesn't justify you. It's a result of you faith. You're justified by faith. Read the whole chapter, start from the first verse. James was talking to partial Christians that claim to be Christians, yet are hypocrites.
Amazing chat, I love both of your guys videos. Awesome to see a collab!
Thank you Ryan for standing firm on what faith in Jesus means, the only doctrine we all absolutely must get right. And for speaking truth in love. God bless brother.
So this guy thinks that roughly 56% of Christians I.e, Catholics and Orthodox are going to hell purely based off of his singular interpretation of the Bible. Absolutely wild!
Everyone before the 1500's 😅😅😅
How narrow is the path?
@@PaperBagGambles Apparently as narrow as independent Protestants want to make... Even if its at the cost of separating itself from any sense of Church history, historical texts, or church tradition.
Exactly what Bible would the Protestants have to come to these conclusions without the institutions of the Catholic and Orthodox churches?
@@MrKreationsHDJust curious. What is NeedGodnet's religion?
@@kri909 Not sure honestly... First time I had seen his work.
Big fan of both of your content so there’s nothing better than a long form chat like this, god bless!
I was from a more Baptist point of view for a long time and redeemed zoomed really convinced me hard this and other videos I’ve seen now, but this one was really thought provoking
REDEEMED ZOOMER NOW!?!? This is awesome.
cliffe knetchle sometime?
Yes
That would be legendary!
Cliffe has definitely shown belief in a works salvation from clips I've seen so that'd be a VERY interesting discussion
@@redturtle820 yes please!!! That would be the most polite conversation ever recorded on video lol
yeah Ryan do a video with him
Power chat guys. Justification through faith in Christ alone is so important🙏
“You see that a man is justified by works and not by faith alone.”
James 2:24
@@HellenicPapistas a catholic I don’t think they believe that dead faith alone justifies. They believe that faith which works through love justifies. Just like us catholic believe in that.
@@Jk-ow8ny I know exactly what you mean with that, but technically on a theological and scriptural basis, it can lead to error or worse: intellectual faith alone.
@@HellenicPapistnobody is arguing that “intellectual” faith justifies. True faith contains good works and a desire to be obedient, but those things don’t merit salvation they prove that faith is genuine.
@@Austin-wu8mx You’d be surprised by the amount of evangelicals that believe you only need to “intellectually”(they don’t use that term, because they think believing He’s Lord is obeying) and/or trust Him alone, that you don’t need to show works at all.
Wooo two of my favorite christian content creator together to speak about God! Love you, God bless you all!
Gentlemen, I'd like to say this has been a great conversation to listen to.
Ryan, thanks for your continuous help in opening up my understanding to scripture. I really appreciate your tone and delivery on your discussions.
Jesus is Lord🙏
My jaw dropped when this video popped up on my page! I love you guys both!!!
@@TheTruthsetsyoufree-j5s In the context of the passage James is addressing outward justification, as in your good works demonstrate (are the fruits of) your faith. Paul uses the same example of Abraham in romans, I suggest you examine both passages with intellectual honesty and you will see we are justified in God's eyes by faith
If Faith Alone means no participation takes place in salvation then is repentance not necessary for salvation? What about Paul’s warnings to the Corinthians about sins that excommunicate them from the kingdom of God? Why would Paul warn of sins to an established church that would largely have already accepted Christ if there should be no fear of losing salvation?
Inheriting the kingdom isn't the same as being in it
Plus Paul told the Corinthians that God will confirm them until the end that they may be blameless in the day of judgement...
@@gambalombo yes it is used the same in the Bible
@@gambalombo so if they are destined to be confirmed why the warning of sin barring them from it? Makes no sense
Simple because everyone ignores the passages that suit them 🤷🏽♂️ Catholics, Protestants etc… whoever will do his will.. will know the doctrine. John 7:17… anyone who will not DO the sayings of Christ is as a man who builds his house on sand..Matthew 7:26. Most don’t want to do Gods will.. they avoid dying to self which is what the gospel calls for. Whether that mean having faith in God and not tradition, or believing that when the Bible warns us about returning to sin it’s for a reason.
I love both your channels! Is both of your channels offers good content relevant for people who are so confused in their doctrines as well as people who never have looked further than their church doctrines. I Thank God for both of you. God bless you always. Keep it going!
Very good conversation guys, I love when two believers collab. This was very cool to watch. Believe in the Lord Jesus Christ and you will be saved. Continue to walk in love and walk in Christ, rightly dividing the Word of God.
Im a big fan of Redeemed zoomer and NeedGod so this collab was nice
This was a very refreshing conversation and thank you so much for uploading it!
Your channel is awesome, man.
I appreciate that! Glory to God
Great conversation. Re the sacraments, they are not a work (ie something you do) so much as something you receive (desire to identify with Christs sacrifice), baptism once, communion over and over again
You've been doing so many amazing collaborations recently! It would be incredible to see you talk to Fr. Mike Schmitz or Trent Horn or someone.
They both would have to being their kid gloves.
Great convo Ryan and Zoomer!! It’s refreshing to see two believers have a chat on important issues while still agreeing on the essentials.
THIS IS WHAT IVE BEEN WAITING FOR!!!!
On the question of someone having an understanding intellectually, then falling away.
I married a man who was in seminary, he started using drugs, eventually abandoned me, and our son… he got another woman pregnant, they’ve since had the baby, and they are engaged, all while he and I are still currently married. He claims God blessed him with this woman, and baby to love and protect, all while abandoning the family God truly blessed him with. So yes. There is knowledge, but no heart change. He is worse than an infidel.
Love your energy man! Liked the collab as well, like how you're open to dialogue. ❤
I just came across your channel. What I've heard so far, you're pretty sound in your teaching of the scriptures.
Reformed Baptist here (1689 London Baptist Confession). I embrace reformed theology but I do not believe in the Presbyterian view of Baptism and especially the infant baptism. Salvation is by faith alone and baptism is just a public declaration of identifying with Christ's death, burial, and resurrection or the public profession of faith. It is not something that saves you. But if you are saved, you should want to obey Christ and be baptized.
I think you're position is reasonable given your understanding of baptism, but those who affirm infant baptism don't think it's just an outward proclaimation, they tie it with being cleansed from original sin and the focus is less on them as an individual, but more of a symbol of being brought into a new family, hense the obvious comparison with circumcision in the old covenant. There's also the fact that as far as I know all of Christendom has practiced infant baptism until relatively recently, and right now Catholic, Orthodox, and major Protestant denominations affirm it. How do you deal with these points?
@@joshuasy10I think this topic is far more complex than many people realize.
Prior to Augustine, it seems that Baptism had vast variety in terms of practice and theology. It's interesting to note that there are numerous early Church fathers who were born to Christian families that were not baptized as infants. Gregory of Nazianzus, Basil the Great, and John Chrysostom to name a few.
On the other end we also have Hippolytus who mentions baptizing children and those who cannot speak for themselves, most likely referring to infants.
What do you think of Titus 3? Paul is clear
Baptism is meant to replace circumcision... which was done to infants
The Baptist idea of baptism being a public declaration is in my opinion partly true. Baptism is best done publicly, but if that’s all it is, you don’t see the apostles going out of their way to make it public. Many of the recorded baptisms are done in relatively private settings. They didn’t wait to get in front of the church body to do it. Instead, baptism should be thought of as the sign of entry to the new covenant. Circumcision was the sign of entry into the old covenant, baptism the sign of the new. Incidentally, if you study how the Old Testament and New Testament refer to circumcision, it was a sign that largely referred to the same spiritual reality as baptism. Yet, the sign given as a seal of righteousness by faith that Abraham had before he was circumcised was also given to his household. The members of his household were given the sign that signified faith, even at 8 days old. Things the line of thinking that led the reformers to accept infant baptism. God redeclares children of believers as covenantally set apart or holy in 1 Cor. 7, so they should receive the sign of the covenant, and the parents should disciple their children from day 1 as believers, praying for fruit and repentance for their children.
God bless these two brothers in Christ
Zoomer is correct here. We are not saved by perfect understanding and assent to correct abstract doctrines but by trust in the living God.
Also, while justification is by grace through faith alone, it necessarily leads to sanctification and true obedience, in which we are very, very active. Sanctification is absolutely necessary, and utterly non-meritorious.
Then follow the mosaic law if you are being obedient
@@achilles1191not under the law of Moses. Under the law of Christ (1 Cor 9:20-21)
@@NomosCharis Mathew 5:18. The law shall not pass till heaven and earth pass away. Did heaven and earth pass away? Roman’s 3:31 yea we establish the law
@@NomosCharis if the law is how we recognize sin. If the law is gone then there is no such thing as sin. So then how can you be obedient and how could you be damned?
Great to think on, I think underplaying works as a necessary outworking of true saving faith is a disservice to Gods will for us. I sometimes get that from these conversations.
Great discussion, love the Perry The Platypus plush 😂
You should speak with Young Anglican, that would be an interesting conversation. I feel like he makes a really strong case for Anglicanism
God bless! ❤
I enjoy this channel immensely and the views shared help me with areas where I am not fully developed. Having said that, I would love to see a discussion between you and FR Stephen De Young.
Please invite him to a discussion at soonest opportunity:)
I am circumcised for medical and hygienic reasons, not because of faith. I hope the Lord will understand
It was not done w/ the intention of being a work or law abidance unto salvation, & may not have even been of your own volition (i.e. you may have been a baby), so God willing it is perfectly understood, He knows everything after all.
@@powerfulaura5166
I did it 4 weeks ago :)
It's not sinful to get circumcised, Paul even got Timothy circumcised to not cause offence to the Jews (Acts 16:3). It's only wrong and will exclude you from heaven if you think it is required to do to go to heaven. Just like it also would if you think any other works are required as well, whether it be baptism, giving, church-going, fasting, etc.
I was too circumcised for medical reasons
@@NeedGodnet1 Peter 3:21
Zoomer is an excellent conversationalist. And I love how even though he concedes that your points are correct he articulates the viewpoint of how of someone who does have faith in Christ and does works at the same time might see it
my two favorite content creators in one screen? God bless these two!
Good listen, gents. Thanks.
Thoroughly enjoyed this conversation, God bless you both!
So glad! Thank you
God does not bless false teachers
@@Theofilus144 Yes, God won’t bless the Pope!
@@bobsbobbs bergoglio is not the pope. The chair is vacant since the death of Pope Pius XII.
the contrast between the older christian’s soft tone and the younger christians fiery tone made the channel OP upload very enjoyable
Christ literally commanded baptism and linked it directly to salvation.
“He that believeth AND IS BAPTIZED shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.”
Mark 16:16
Not in the earliest manuscripts, so dangerous to base your doctrine of a verse that isn't in the earliest manuscripts
@@oklol7616 false. It’s cited by the Church Fathers in the first century Church. Prior to the canon being complied.
@@St.MosestheBlackNo, most scholars will recognise that only the first 8 verses are in the earliest manuscripts.
Cite 1 church father in the 1st century that cited Mark 16:16(Or any other verse after Mark 16:8 after Mark chapter 16)
@@oklol7616 “Since Jesus died for everyone, believers and unbelievers, it is evident that not only belief but also baptism is required. For Jesus said, 'He who believes and is baptized shall be saved, but he who does not believe shall be condemned.' Belief alone is not sufficient, but the confession of that belief in baptism is also necessary.” - Origen (c. 184-253 AD)
“He that believes and is baptized shall be saved; but he that does not believe shall be condemned.’ Yet this condemnation comes not from the mere non-believing, but from the rejection of the truth when it has been offered. Therefore, baptism is a means of accepting Christ, and rejection of baptism signifies rejection of Him.”- St. John Chrysostom (c. 349-407 AD)
“When the Savior says, ‘He that believes and is baptized shall be saved,’ He does not mean that the water is more powerful than the Spirit, but that the water serves as a symbol and the Spirit sanctifies. Faith alone is dead without the works; and thus, baptism, which follows upon faith, is necessary for salvation.” - St. Cyril of Jerusalem (c. 313-386 AD)
“You have read, therefore, that the three witnesses in baptism, which bear testimony on earth, are one: the water, the blood, and the Spirit, and they bear witness to the salvation of our souls. And this is what is signified in the words of the Lord: 'He that believes and is baptized shall be saved.'” - St. Ambrose of Milan (c. 340-397 AD)
“We are persuaded that no one can be saved without baptism; for the words of Christ are clear: ‘He who believes and is baptized shall be saved.’ The water of baptism brings the Spirit, and the Spirit brings life. This is why our Lord connects salvation not just to belief, but to the sacrament of baptism.” - St. Gregory Nazianzus (c. 329-390 AD)
Are you sure he’s talking about water baptism? Baptism of the spirit happens at the time of salvation, which happens when we believe and have faith.
You should talk to Jordan Cooper or Bryan Wolfmueller about Baptism vs Faith. Both Lutherans. They do a great job talking about the Lutheran view of how both are compatible!
What a great video and a great discussion.
Redeemed zoomer was very respectful. However, to be converted by opinions of man is concerning. I would encourage a personal spiritual experience to confirm a truth, not an opinion or interpretation of man.
I also can't believe how many people just pick and choose what scriptures are important.... do we cut out the book of James? It says "faith without works is dead"... is he wrong?.... isn't faith a work? This doesn't lessen what the saviour did for us, though. The atonement works whether we are good or not, but surely works directed by your faith could be a better way of living? It God didn't create the world (a work), but nothing could go forward.
In regards to the circumcisions issue, both can be saved. Circumcision isn't a saving ordinance. Baptism is, though (and baptism is a work, something we have been asked to do, to work towards living with God). This also shows some will be saved and not live with God. Sounds like many mansions? Sounds like more than one kingdom of glory?
Great Collab Ryan and Richard 🔥 waiting for Gavin collab and please continue focusing on Catholicism because very little Christians focuses on them since they are more focused in Church History than the Gospel.
And the Pentecostals ignore Church history and supplant the gospel with later restorationist views. Church history is our history. We Protestant greatly err in thinking that church history is Roman Catholic history.
Great conversation.
The Bible says that it’s our iniquities separate us from God (Is 59:2) not necessarily our sinful-nature which we inherited from Adam.
Newborns are completely innocent of any iniquity, therefore they are not separated from God, therefore they do go to heaven if they were to die.
Next up: Trent Horn or Catholic Answers
I would love to see more honest conversations like this between Christians that include LDS people too
@27:45 But wouldn't being baptised be trusting in Jesus? seeing as he was the one who asked us to get baptised
I think point is, do we need it in order to be saved?
It seems u do it to show to men that u are in Christ. It's not sth u present b4 God to be added to complete ur salvation.
Like, God demonstrating redemption to Cornelius even without being baptized. Peter commanding their baptism was not what granted them redemption b4 the Lord, but already possessed it far b4 the baptism. It's Jesus commanding us to spread the good news. I don't believe if u don't spread the Gospel u will goto hell.
@@NATAR160 I somewhat i agree i just think to say theres absolutely no point in being baptized if you can seems contradictory to what jesus said
36:40 very nice how I feel about Catholics. Man I love everybody. Now let’s love and bring more in!
Still think you need to have a good Catholic on. I keep hearing mistakes in articulating Catholic beliefs that go continually unchallenged.
God is Righteous and Just, walk in Christ and through Him we will be made so!
I ❤the Catholic Church
Assurance is vital and 1 John is largely addressing it. I wish I had been taught the scriptures which could assure m way back when I first came to faith. I did eventually read all the hard perseverance passages on perseverance and the wonderful assurance passages too. Praise God I am saved and I understand why.
The two best Christian content creators
No
@@UniteAgainstEvil dang 😅
@@elijahonyoutubehehe..well, OP could never justify that claim so my comment was easy ❤
@@CatfoodChronicles6737❤ love you
@@UniteAgainstEvilyou are a pretty odd individual
Thank you so much for this collaboration. Love the way both respected ea h order but laid your points down 👏 👏 👏 👏 👏 👏 👏 👏 👏 👏 👏 👏 👏 🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉
Never expected this collab
I’ve never heard so many misrepresentations of what Catholics believe in such a short time. Initial justification is not merited by faith OR works, soley Gods grace.
So what are the sacraments got to do with keeping salvation?
@@jhedjoardumago7691the sacraments are visible signs of inward grace. So by definition, they are the normative vehicles in which God uses to give us grace. It’s not something we “do” as a work but something received from God.
Baptism as a requirement is a false gospel? Why would we prioritize the teachings of Paul over the words of Jesus Christ?
We ought not put them against each other, as if the Bible is in conflict. They are not prioritized over each other.
Now do jimmy akin
Ooooooh boy
He would not be able to keep up with Jimmy
💀😂 or Trent horn or unfourtunantly Peter dimond
@@TheTruthsetsyoufree-j5s what?
😂😂😂
My revelation of Christ came through work so I can have faith hopefully he gives me grace for being grateful for the blood he pours on our sins
Again, after watching another video from these guys, I'm certain that being Catholic is a blessing I can never thank God enough for. I actually feel bad for protestants. It's ironic hearing their arguments against the Catholic/Orthodox church and other Protestants.
Bowing down and praying to a statue of Mary is breaking commandment number 2. Oh that’s right, Catholicism decided to remove commandment number 2 relating to idolatry….
Jesus said to call no man father on earth because you have one Father in heaven…
Uh… this is embarrassing..
Same for me. but they will slander us anyway
@@HeSavedMethe 10 commandments don’t have a number in front of them in the Bible. There are many ways to regroup them to make them 10. The Jews have their way. The early Christian Church another. Protestants another. All are legitimate. There’s nothing to hide: the commandments are all there in full in Exodus and Deuteronomy.
“For I became *your father* in Christ Jesus through the gospel” (1 Cor 4:15)
I guess Paul hadn’t got the memo 🤦🏻
You brought up probably the two most ridiculous objections to Catholicism. It’s fine. You still have a long journey back home. I’ll pray for you. God bless you.
@@HeSavedMe No, a bow is not worship, and nothing was removed from Exodus chapter 20 in the Catholic Bible if you bothered to read it. But continue to lie about us and continue your slander. It will go well for you.
I don't think Orthodoxy and Roman Catholicism should be spoken of in correlation. There is a lot shared but also a lot more that separates us as denominations. I do agree though, this video seemed more of like a glaze fest between two guys who's beliefs correlate pretty much completely rather than a discussion that makes you interested.
I’ve heard about the Trust in Christ terminology before. I love it. I have even heard of a trust in Christ leading to confidence. Confidence in Christ baby! He is the Savior of all who hearten to his words!
As a Catholic, I don’t understand how someone can use the example of Paul talking against circumcision as a reason to say we don’t need baptism. Yes if you think you need circumcision, Christ is of no use to you BECAUSE circumcision was the requirement of the old covenant, and we are not in the old covenant anymore. Paul also says that baptism replaces circumcision. If circumcision saves you in the old covenant, he seems like he thinks baptism saves you in the new covenant. Peter even says “baptism now saves you”
Like i could not see Paul talking about baptism the way he talks about circumcision. I think Paul would be super scandalous if baptism doesnt save us.
It's frustrating listening to NeedGod. He misrepresents the Catholic position and when corrected, he still misrepresents it. He thinks the Catholic Church teaches a false Gospel while literally preaching a false Gospel of Once Saved Always Saved.
@@pchuck1439 yeah. He acts like we believe in pelagianism.
@@pchuck1439 OSAS is true?
@@mranumous No. It's not Biblical and neither the Church nor the Apostles thought it. Satan believes in Jesus and he's not saved.
Thanks for your approach into Christianity Protestantism brave soldier of Jesus 🥳😇👍🙏🤍
@ needGod net. Would you be willing to have a conversation about Catholic justification compared to the Protestant view? I personally don't think they are different as people think.
Have it here with me right now. I'll show you the true Gospel.
Starting with Ephesians 2:8-9.
@@carsonianthegreat4672 nah fr?
What is your point with ephesians? That we are saved( united to Christ) by grace through faith and not by works? Catholics believe the same thing@@axxel9626
@@axxel9626Do Protestants usually use two verses for their theology? Because those verses are clearly not talking about the gospel. 😂
@@Emmanuel_EEE i got like 60 verses representing the Gospel. The Gospel is so easy, Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and you'll be saved for eternity. It's not rocket science. And i ain't protestant
A good work is not from us or of us. It is all God that does the work through us. The work on our part is to obey and allow Him to do His will. We use our free will accordingly and righteously by accepting and allowing Him
I was hoping for this!
From looking into Ephesians 2:8-10 this is the understanding I get from it. This is how the 3 verses make sense to me. I would love to get your thoughts on it.
Salvation is by the grace of God which is a gift, we receive this gift by faith
We can’t say it is by our own doing by working for it because God already made us to do good works. Like a fish can’t boast about swimming and a bird cant about flying, we can’t boast about what we were made to do.
Real faith is therefore a working faith because we can’t say we have faith in Christ and not do what he made us for.
However this working faith alone still does not mean we are saved as we still sin and we are born into a fallen world.
Salvation is ultimately then by the grace of God, we get this by having faith and we have faith by doing the good works we were created for.
I also looked into the direct disciples of the apostles, Ignatius, Polycarp and Clement of Rome all wrote about faith in a similar way. That faith goes hand in hand with work works.
Regardless I’d love your thoughts on the way I’ve understood the passage in Ephesians
I'm a catechumen in the Orthodox Church. And I enjoyed this dialogue even though I disagreed with most of it.
Salvation - you need faith in Christ but this includes good works. Christ said those who love me keep my commandments. The epistle of James says faith without works is dead. Many times in the scriptures when Paul is talking about works he's referring to the law of Moses and the traditions within the old covenant. Cooperating with God's Grace by being faithful and obediance to Jesus that is what saves. Paul says to work out our salvation with fear and trembling. To claim we have complete insurance of our salvation is false. We know we can fall away which is why we need to spend our entire life in faithfulness and obediance.
Baptism - this is necessary for salvation. There's so many overwhelming bible passages that support this and the writings of the church fathers.
Sacraments - Jesus himself said that those who do not eat my body and drink my blood have no life in them. The sacraments are the means of grace. The church is the body of Christ and the priests are those who are ordained to administer the sacraments. The priests represent the Apostles who represent Christ this can be seen when Christ gives the keys of the kingdom to Peter and the laying on of hands to confer the priesthood. Rejecting the institution that Christ established is not trusting and putting your faith in Christ himself. He said that the gates of hades would not prevail against his church. The idea that more than 1500 years later people would come along and rewrite the theologies of Historic Christianity goes against the entire mission of Christ.
It is very clear that we are not saved by works. The only way around that is to try to redefine things that we do in order to be saved as "not actually works" which is clearly corrupted and wrong.
How can you know you are presently saved if the possibility exists in the future for you to go apostate in which case your position condemns you as never being saved to begin with?
Without exhaustive foreknowledge of a settled future it’s impossible to know if someone is presently saved under the OSAS/Perseverance of the Saints positions.
Ryan do you hold Calvinistic beliefs and or theology?
I was thinking this as well. Are you calvinistic?
he secretly does, his moderators promote double predestination
@@toofargonemcoc that's rather unfortunate. How could you believe in God when he punishes us for sins he made us do?
@@isaaccampos2393 dont take my word for it, ask his mods on his livestream if calvinism is true, and ask if double predestination is true
@@toofargonemcoc I will at some point, thank you for your response and time.
Baptism concept is purification that also linked to the jewish purification ceremony of engagement between bridegroom and the bride, after the ceremony they wear white dress as symbol of holiness that is also linked to the wedding garment mentioned in matthew 22. Also Jesus’s last message was to make disciples and baptize people in the name of the Father, the Son and Holy Spirit.
A lot of progress Christianity keeps circumcising Jesus’ teachings.
I think the problem is the definition of work. I find it funnny that in galatians paul says baptism is not a work,
Galatians 3:26-27 ESV
[26] for in Christ Jesus you are all sons of God, through faith. [27] For as many of you as were baptized into Christ have put on Christ.
I think this is rather clear, baptisk is not our work, but God's, now obviously if someone believes they sre saved by their baptism then they arent trusting in christ, but what abous someone who believes there baptism, saved them and was efficacious unto salvation, because of their faith. Meaning that they received salvation in baptism by faith
Yeah, but baptism will never save. It's could lead to faith, or a result of faith. But it never saves.
@@jhedjoardumago7691 the problem is, the bible used the language "baptism now saves you" so whatever that means, it does me that we are able to say baptism now saves. So because the bible says "baptism saves", I say, "baptism saves". Now what does that mean? I agree with redeemed zoomer, it is the distinction between sign and thing signifed which can properly be spoken of as one sacrament
@@carterwoodrow4805 give us the verse where you find "baptism saves", along with the verses around it for context.
@@jhedjoardumago7691 1 peter 3:21 (baptism which corresponds to this now saves you, not as a removal of dirt from the flesh but as an appeal to God through a good conscience). What that verse means can be debated, but either way, we can say baptism saves, because the bible says baptism saves.
@@jhedjoardumago7691 sure, we can include that there. It's not my point. My point is that the bible says baptism saves, there I will say baptism saves.
Good friendly discussion between two brothers in Christ!
Do a video with Sam Shamoun
@@ivanpapac8158 this!!!!
THIS!!!!
@@ivanpapac8158 this for sure!
Not a bad idea at all
Now that's the proper source for Catholicism input, not Voice of Reason.
this was like watching a young john Macarthur talking to a young RC Sproul. Both of whom I have High regards. Thay may be reformed in both teachings but they're both different when it comes to baptism.
Talk to Christian B. Wagner
Watching this at the gym. Thx for the entertainment ✝️❤️
What a disappointing video. 2 Protestants disagreeing on if baptism is a work and is required shows that "Bible alone" doesn't work.
disagreements and discussions don't negate from the fact that only the Bible is an infallible authority. you have countless disagreements throughout members of the RCC and orthodox churches. just because there's a higher authority doesn't mean what they're declaring as true/infallible is correct.
@---bl2uj The disagreements in the apostolic churches are not on the basics. It''s on other things like the hypostatic union, iconoclasm, purgatory, Marian doctrine. Protestants can't agree on anything.
@@Sinha010 that's completely false. protestants have a lot more unity than you think on salvific issues and we acknowledge that the Church is a living organism of believers everywhere not just in our institutions. also i feel like the issues you mentioned are pretty big ones lol
@@---bl2ujThe problem is is that we have different bibles. There was also several hundred years of debate on the canon of scripture in the early church. Protestants took books out of the canon and therefore can’t consistently hold to sola scriptura.
The Church and its councils are the authority because they’re the tradition that Christ established. He never gave you a Bible but a Church.
@---bl2uj It's not false. As you can see on this video, they can't agree on baptismal regeneration, and that has been resolved since the apostles. Baptism saves. You can have on the same block a fundamentalist Baptist, church, a Reformed Baptist church, a Presbyterian church and a Prosperity Church and they will all doubt the others' salvation
I loved this. Although I am interested to know how you both would respond to verses catholics tend to bring up like James 2:17 that talk about faith without works being dead. Wanted to hear if there were any differing opinions between you two
Every passage these two commentators go to in St Paul's corpus they both assume the word meaning associated with their denomination and a version of atonement theory associated with faith and justification excluding works. Presumably the Protestant Christian assumes a form of penal substitution theory which requires the instrumentality of faith.
Where does the bible and/or tradition teach faith is an instrument when there is no evidence Abraham's faith was an instrument?
The bible never teaches faith is an instrument of justification.
Why believe faith is an instrument and man is justified by faith alone when no text says a man is justified by faith alone?
Why believe faith apart from works of the law means faith alone when hope saves and faith without love is worthless?
“Though I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, but have not love, I have become sounding brass or a clanging cymbal. And though I have the gift of prophecy, and understand all mysteries and all knowledge, and though I have all faith, so that I could remove mountains, but have not love, I am nothing. And though I bestow all my goods to feed the poor, and though I give my body to be burned, but have not love, it profits me nothing.”
@@bjornlarsen7440 The typical faith and works argument ignores the context of St Pauls letters and additional information given in other letters, the gospels and church history. Faith alone requires sophistic argumentation presuming faith alone is a fictional truth claim.
@@MrJohnmartin2009 I agree brother you can have faith that moves mountains but without love you are nothing. Faith has to produce love for God and fellow man. Without that faith is dead.
@@bjornlarsen7440 Justification is through an interior regeneration associated with faith, hope and love presumed in Abraham's life contrary to the Prot alien righteousness and an extrinsic imputation of Jesus righteosuness.
How can you say that the Bible never teaches that Abraham's faith is instrumental when the Bible clearly states that? Galatians 3: 5-6, anyone?
Loved this! Ryan can you please make a video about where the Presbyterian faith differs than what the bible teaches (if it does)? I was born a Presbyterian myself, but I identify as Christian only.
God bless you always❤
Presbyterianism is very biblical! It does not differ from what the bible teaches. Stay Presbyterian as it is a historical reformed denomination with lots of resources to help you in your faith. Read the Westminster confession for a view of what presbyterians believe and why!
Still waiting on a response to Voice of Reason…
It's currently up
the collab we didnt know we needed.
When they talk about by faith alone quoting Matthew... I'm baffled how they completely skipped the first part of the text which reads “Not everyone who says to Me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ shall enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father in heaven.
When separated, you can make the case either you need faith only, or works only. Taken together, Jesus is making the case that you need both faith & work.
Faith alone can lie, Work alone will die.
Typical Protestants standing on their own man made Protestant doctrines. God's church did not fail and become apostate, as Presbyterian and non-denom Christians declare. There is a major misconception in Protestantism when the Bible says that following the Law cannot save you, when every Epistle is referring to the Law of Moses, which was a major dispute in Early Christianity because the former Jews-turned-Christian were telling Christians you still needed to follow the Law of Moses, and many of the Epistles were authoritatively stating that you are not to follow the Law of Moses anymore. But the truth is that you must have faith and follow the Law of Jesus, if you want to have any chance of entering the Kingdom of God. In Protestantism, you can do whatever you want, but as long as you "believe", you will be saved, is a false gospel and a damnable, novel teaching created in the 1600s.
Cannot part of that Will be accepting that Jesus is the only way to salvation, and that it is not by OUR good works will bring us closer or farther to the kingdom of Heaven, but only through our faith in His (Jesus’s) good work? Because I guess from my perspective if I am required to perform something to save myself, then I do play a part in my salvation. So who saved me? Me + Jesus, which is not just Jesus. I did my part, and he did his part, but both parts were required. We share credit in getting me to heaven.
This versus Him taking all the credit, He has paid the debt, I realize I am a sinner deserving of hell in need of rescue, I put my faith in His power at the cross that I do not deserve, then out of completely overwhelming love and gratitude towards Him and what He’s done I do good works which are never out of fear that if I refuse (which I wouldn’t, hypothetically, if I want to love and serve Jesus well!) to do them I’ll go to hell.
What do you think of this? I feel like our ideas on it are very close, but not exactly the same.
@@nervousdorito3696 you must cooperate with God's grace to be saved. If you sin after being born again, you must repent, and if you don't repent of very major sins, your salvation is lost. You cannot keep sinning and expect to enter the kingdom of God.
@@David-we3sb We will sin for the rest of our lives because we are sinners, it is inevitable. All sin is deadly and hurts God, but by the power of the Holy Spirit we will also continue to be sanctified; recognizing our sin, being convicted of it, and rejecting it as we come to better know God and His Will. I think this language of cooperate is difficult because if I CO-OPERATE with anyone, including God, we are operating together as distinct entities and thus I get part credit- this versus me accepting and putting my faith in Jesus and realizing that in my sinful nature I can’t do anything on my own, but am in desperate need of the Holy Spirit to purify my desires and point them towards God.
It’s not an attitude, though, of, ‘Well if God doesn’t want to me do this, he’ll make me stop.’ We ARE able to know God’s feelings towards sin, and if we love God and have the Holy Spirit working in us we will begin to see our sin, hate it, and resist it; thus His desires overtaking and replacing our desires, not by my power but His own.
Another question if I could ask, does Catholicism believe that any and all sin is deserving of hell, or certain kinds (for believers)? I think someone told me one time, but I don’t think I fully understood.
If I could add another example too. I would say when I accepted Jesus, my sin became ‘worse’ before it got better- but God was using that to reveal to me how depraved I really was. Was I going to hell at that point in time, or did God know I was going to commit those further sins and cover that sin on the cross knowing that I was His child in the midst of being sanctified (as I still am being sanctified), and in his radical love did not abandon or forsake me, but continued to work in me?
Because I guess again from my perspective, if I had been separated from God at that point, I would not have had any further conviction towards my sin, but I did because He was in me working.
No fear of hell ever motivated me away from sin, because I didn’t believe I could be separated from Him, but a complete awestruck gratitude towards my Creator for saving me, not because of what I would or could or would not do for Him, but out of love for me. If He did that for me, how could I keep sinning against Him? Additionally I wish to do good works now, not because if I don’t I’m guilty of sinning against Him, but because I can bring more glory to the God who saved me when He didn’t have to.
What do you think about that, or what do you think the Catholic position would probably be?
@@David-we3sbJohn 6:40 For this is the will of my Father, that everyone who looks on the Son and believes in him should have eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day."
My dad, who was raised a Catholic and converted to Christianity as an adult. He would ask his catholic family or friends if the pope said something that contradicted the Bible who would they believe the Bible or the Pope? Their answer was how he could tell if they were saved or not.
That was amazing! I actually unfollowed Redeemed Zoomer a while ago because of his defense of catholicism/orthodoxy, but with this conversation now it does seem like he is a well intentioned christian. I'm glad he seems to be realizing the dangers of these false gospels, although it kinda seems like he is still too in their defense, i don't know... We'll see how it goes from now.
I'm super happy that Ryan is getting more recognition as a great online evangelizer and a force from good in the Kingdom of God!
Redeemed Zoomer seems to be very knowledgeable about theology and he produces some good content, which would definitely be way better if he spent less time defending these idolatrous cults.
But either way, God bless you both! Amazing to see such an in depth conversation about theology from two very smart and wise christians! 🥰🙏🏻💙🙌🏻✝️
Why such hatred toward Orthodoxy?
@@Hendrix_ why such difficulty in relying completely on Jesus?
They oppose false gospel, that's not hatred for orthodoxy but rather love for the ones still not believing the gospel.
@@phetmoz Maybe listening to the bible and praying for them instead of publicly denouncing their faith would be more Christ-like. Excommunicating/blocking out other Christians for their interpretation of the Bible isn't something we should do, we need to have conversations like NeedGod had with Kyle the other week, not push away people because they are of a different perspective.
@@Hendrix_ While listening to the Bible and praying for others are important, we must also remember that Jesus and the apostles frequently called out false teachings and corrected misunderstandings of the faith. Publicly denouncing false doctrines is not about pushing people away, but about protecting the integrity of the gospel and guiding professed believers towards the truth. When Paul confronted Peter in Galatians 2, he did so publicly for the sake of the community's understanding. Similarly, excommunicating or blocking out individuals who persistently spread harmful interpretations can be necessary to preserve the health of the church. The orthodox & Catholic church are behemoths of false doctrine. Dialogue is important, but so is maintaining the purity of the message we share.
@@phetmozCatholics teach the true faith.
From the Catholic perspective, receiving the sacraments is no more a “work” than intellectually assenting to or trusting in God. I like to think of grace as a bulletproof vest that God places on us. We don’t choose to put it on, and have no merit in being saved from death by the incoming bullet of sin, but we can choose to take it off and deny the gift that was given to us. We don’t freely choose or merit grace, but we can reject it. The grace from sacraments aren’t earned by us, but participating in them is simply not rejecting His gift
We’re not gonna talk about Calvinism? I almost left the faith based on Calvinism. It’s so false. Yes, there are some scripture that seems like it could support it, but it doesn’t. I believe that’s more important than talking about Catholics in this video.
For example though, in the beginning he asked the guy “how do you get to heaven” (roughly), and the guy said “through Jesus alone, putting faith in what He did”. That’s a contradiction, if God chose you, it doesn’t matter if you put faith in Him or not, He chose you right? I just believe the Calvinism view takes out free will. It hurts my brain to even think about it. I dug deep on it a few months ago and found myself in a hole. Jesus pulled me out of that hole
I agree with you against calvinism. Ultimately, if God chose some and rejected others, God would have to ensure this by being in complete control of our actions. The mystery of calvinism is god makes us sin, and punishes us for it.
@@isaaccampos2393 100%. There are always two sides of the coin. If God chooses for someone to be saved, then God also chooses for someone to not be saved. That’s evil in my eyes. It would be limited free will almost.
@@crazydogdog2831 Precisely. I seems to also defeat the purpose of love. What kind of love is love that is forced. It's not love at all.
I haven't watched the whole video, but I was a bit worried when Ryan said he agreed with regeneration before faith. I wonder if he's a reformed baptist(if he believes in tulip)
@@crazydogdog2831 God is under no obligation to save anyone. He can show mercy to whomever He wants and show His justice to whomever He wants. That doesn't make Him evil.
At 28:23 he says that works are physical action and faith is not a work because it is simply trust. But I think this is counter to what scripture teaches.
The reason faith isn’t a work is not because it isn’t physical. It’s because it is a gift from God. Otherwise you’d be able to boast about it. That would indicate it could be considered a work if it weren’t a gift.
Ephesians 2:8-9 (HCSB): 8 For you are saved by grace through faith, and this is not from yourselves; it is God’s gift- 9 not from works, so that no one can boast.
It’s the same idea in Romans. It’s not physical or mental activity in man that is essential, but the action of God on the behalf of his “vessels of mercy”.
Romans 9:16 (HCSB): 16 So then it does not depend on human will or effort but on God who shows mercy.
Faith is a work, but it doesn't save you. You respond in faith after BEING saved.
13:00 It's Jesus who said "Whoever believes AND is baptized will be saved..." in Mark 16:16
You could also say whoever believes AND sins will be saved. Because you BELIEVE, you will be saved no matter what follows.
Was the thief on the cross baptized with water? No.
Baptism also refers to being baptized by the Holy Spirit.
Lastly, the ending of Mark is not in the earliest manuscripts.
Should you get baptized? Yes. When I was saved I had an overwhelming urge and desire to be baptized and do good works but I know I was saved before water baptism.
Thinking you need anything else to be saved other than faith in Jesus is saying you don’t believe Jesus is enough.
@@jettruthHe said belief and baptism, not belief alone.
@@jettruth No, it's saying I believe Jesus was telling the truth when He said those who believe AND are baptized will be saved.
I don't think we should ignore Jesus's words. We should believe Him and not do mental gymnastics to say "baptism" doesn't REALLY mean "baptism".
That's what Satan did in the Garden of Eden, "Did God REALLY say...?"
Jesus said it. We should believe it even if it doesn't line up with our current theology.
@@TJMcCarty And in act at some point gentiles receive the Holy Spirit and are saved only by believing the Gospel, without WATER BAPTISM, maybe instead of taking every scripture to yourself, study and see that there is clear transition of how God work with people, the Bible does tell us to rightly DIVIDE the word of truth for a reason, or else you should probably go and build an ark.
1:This verse is not in the earliest manuscripts, so it is dangerous to base your doctrine off this.
2: It says in the following passage that whoever doesn’t believe is condemned rather than those who aren’t baptised are condemned.