"If evangelicalism means behavioralism, moralism, nationalism, which the connotation has certainly become that, then I'm not an evangelical. If evangelicalism means the gospel is true, the Bible is true, people need Jesus to change us from the inside out, not by good works but by faith and the gift of His grace, then I'm an evangelical." Such an amazing quote, I had to write it down.
But what does the Bible say? 31 “When the Son of Man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, then he will sit on his glorious throne. 32 Before him will be gathered all the nations, and he will separate people one from another as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats. 33 And he will place the sheep on his right, but the goats on the left. 34 Then the King will say to those on his right, ‘Come, you who are blessed by my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world. 35 For I was hungry and you gave me food, I was thirsty and you gave me drink, I was a stranger and you welcomed me, 36 I was naked and you clothed me, I was sick and you visited me, I was in prison and you came to me.’ 37 Then the righteous will answer him, saying, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you drink? 38 And when did we see you a stranger and welcome you, or naked and clothe you? 39 And when did we see you sick or in prison and visit you?’ 40 And the King will answer them, ‘Truly, I say to you, as you did it to one of the least of these my brothers,[a] you did it to me.’ (Matthew 25:31-40) The sheep are saved by what they did. 14 "What good is it, my brothers, if someone says he has faith but does not have works? Can that faith save him? 15 If a brother or sister is poorly clothed and lacking in daily food, 16 and one of you says to them, “Go in peace, be warmed and filled,” without giving them the things needed for the body, what good[a] is that? 17 So also faith by itself, if it does not have works, is dead. 18 But someone will say, “You have faith and I have works.” Show me your faith apart from your works, and I will show you my faith by my works. 19 You believe that God is one; you do well. Even the demons believe-and shudder! 20 Do you want to be shown, you foolish person, that faith apart from works is useless? 21 Was not Abraham our father justified by works when he offered up his son Isaac on the altar? 22 You see that faith was active along with his works, and faith was completed by his works; 23 and the Scripture was fulfilled that says, “Abraham believed God, and it was counted to him as righteousness”-and he was called a friend of God. 24 You see that a person is justified by works and not by faith alone. 25 And in the same way was not also Rahab the prostitute justified by works when she received the messengers and sent them out by another way? 26 For as the body apart from the spirit is dead, so also faith apart from works is dead." (James2:14-26) Faith without works is dead. 12 "And I saw the dead, great and small, standing before the throne, and books were opened. Then another book was opened, which is the book of life. And the dead were judged by what was written in the books, according to what they had done." (Revelation 20:12) They were judged according to what they had done. 6 "He will render to each one according to his works: 7 to those who by patience in well-doing seek for glory and honor and immortality, he will give eternal life; 8 but for those who are self-seeking[a] and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness, there will be wrath and fury." (Romans 2:6) According to their works. 34 "A new commandment I give unto you, That ye love one another; as I have loved you, that ye also love one another. 35 By this shall all men know that ye are my disciples, if ye have love one to another." (John 13:34-35) Love! 13 "So now faith, hope, and love abide, these three; but the greatest of these is love." (1 Corinthians 13:13) First come Grace, totally unwarranted and undeserved, then Faith, but if the Faith has no Works it is dead, so Grace, Faith, Works and lastly, Love, of God and of each other, amen. God bless :o)
"The Ten Minute Bible Hour" and "The Bible Project" are probably the two best things on the internet! Thank you for all the time you invest to make these happen!
@@chupie3085 you should check them out. They're a very talented group of Christians who teach biblical stories and the gospel, the good news, with top notch animation.
@@ljackson4574 just looked them up and watched their most recent video. Very impressed! Learned a lot. Thank you for reccomending them to me. 😀 I have quite a few Christian content creators that I fallow and I'm always happy to add more.
As a Roman Catholic I so appreciate your videos and interviews. I have Southern Baptist relatives. Please do a video so I can help understand my family.
Before, I couldn’t stand hearing about different Christian denominations, but now that I’m taking world religions and watching Matt, I can appreciate them without sacrificing my Catholic beliefs.
Some have already mentioned this, but for the sacramental traditions, the sacraments, particularly focusing on baptism and the Lord’s Supper, are not works. They are not something we do; they are something that God does to us. God is the primary actor, not us. We receive by faith (which is here a position of dependence, not intellectual assent, so even infants can have faith as they are utterly dependent). This is a good discussion though. I enjoy thoughtful theological dialogue, even when I disagree in some places.
Not trying to be mean or anything but isn't marriage considered a sacrament too? And one that is done from one partner to another? I know that doesn't take away from your point there, but that also wasn't the purpose.
Disagree, and here is why: Jesus says "Take this in remembrance of me". Both tanking and remembering are actions that the user takes in his/her own life. Therefore they are works. If you wanted to argue that after the action by the user (aka works), that the holy spirit then does something to us in return then great (I think there is plenty of scripture to back that up), make that point. But the initial action is a work which is why its not required in order to be a christian. God can only be the primary actor if he is literally forcing us to do the action. If we have freewill (or any sway what so ever) on a specific decision then we are the primary actor(s). Im not gonna open the can of worms on freewill vs pre determination any further...
The only 'action' or 'work' on our part (according to the catholic understanding) in the Sacraments is prayer. In the case of the Eucharist, we pray to God in Faith, that by His Grace, He becomes present for us behind the outward appearance of bread and wine, we do this according to His commandment in Scripture. I have been (Anglican) protestant and now Catholic, both traditions which have sacraments, and it never really occurred to me that the Sacraments were works (I always thought that other practices of the Catholic Church would be closer to this criticism of being 'works').
Don't forget the Charismatic churches which are linked to the Pentecostal branch of the tree which come out of Evangelical branch but are slightly different.
“Knowledge of the Gospel and surrender to the Gospel are not the same thing” AMEN!!! That moment I gave my life to Christ, trusted Him, surrendered ALL to Him, repented for all sins and asked for forgiveness, was and will always be the most amazing moment of my life, to receive the gift of eternal life through Jesus Christ, to be born again and baptized, to know the Holy Spirit in dwells in me and convicts me and guides me, God is SO good, His mercy, His love, His forgiveness, thank you Jesus Christ my Lord and Saviour!!!! I love you LORD!!
Matt, you've done it again! These dialogues are great. Speaking as a Catholic, I'm happy that we're getting around to the traditions that are much different from my own. It's good to hear people who disagree with me talk about their beliefs freely, guard down. It really gets me going. However, there is something Jeff articulated well, but that I disagree with. I think he's very articulate and clear when describing how each believer must come to understand scripture as the supreme authority. Makes total sense. But, and here's what I don't quite understand, if you're trying to figure out what's scripture and what isn't, don't you need a pre-existing basis upon which to judge that? For example, if I'm looking at the Gospel of John and wondering if it's inspired, doesn't that presuppose that I've already been taught what's been revealed by Christ so as to judge whether John lines up with that? This basis that pre-exists scripture and subsequently tracks alongside it is just what Catholics call Tradition. In sum, Scripture presupposes Tradition. Both contain revelation. Matt, how would a Protestant respond to that?
I know Matt could give you a better, perhaps cleaner explanation of the details, and perhaps my explanation can be lacking (from now on I will emphazise certain words in all caps because I don't know how to put them in bold) but as a Protestant I would use the example of King Josiah to explain how I believe we ought to treat the Church's way of arranging and recognizing Scripture. When king Josiah was given the scrolls of the Law, which were given by God and written by man, he RECOGNIZED them as the Word of God that was given to Moses, and he decided to DEVOTE himself and Israel to the Law of God. The Law was the revelation, he just recognized it as such (by God's providence). Now apply that to the Early Church and the New Testament. The Apostles wrote down the Gospels, the Epistles, Luke wrote down Acts, and John wrote Revelation. And during the period of the Early Church they DEVOTED themselves to the Apostles teachings, which reflected what they actually experienced, which was the ministry and power of Christ. The RECOGNIZED the words of the Apostles as the Word of God, just as Josiah RECOGNIZED the words of Moses as the Word of God. The key here is now their response, they devoted themselves, they surrendered all their authority to these words, they did not make themselves into a new, secondary authority because they recognized what God had said, but became sole subjects of the Word of God. And the Counsils then simply reaffiremed what was already considered authoritative, the didn't CHOOSE, they RECOGNIZED. One last thing, when Paul gave the famous warning in Galatians about rejecting false Gospels, he included HIMSELF!! that means he was subject of the previous revelation, and if he ever tried to reinterpret it or change it in any way, he asked them to reject HIM. If the Church is wholy subject to the Word, then tradition has no authority, for tradition may, over time, contradict Scripture without meaning to, and if that ever happens, my duty is to REJECT tradition.
That assumes that Catholicism is the only tradition. What about Eastern Orthodox? What about the Anglican Church? Each of these can trace a tradition back to the era of Apostles and Christ himself. What about the Messianic Jewish tradition? It can trace back even further. Perhaps it's not in a specific "Church" but in "the church" that the tradition is found.
@@OfficialDiRT The Anglican church was a splinter from the Roman Catholic church. So the focused should only be on the Orthodox and Catholic church. Prior to the great schism in 1054, they were united as the universal catholic church. I tend to look at which church (between the two) carried out Christ great commission, that is, spreading the Good news to the world. To me, it was the Roman Catholic church that did that and so, i have landed my faith onto that church.
As a Catholic this helps me appreciate my evangelical friends more. And I feel that if they watched your videos, they would appreciate their Catholic friends more too. Thanks for such a balanced approach to looking at a topic people are passionate about!
A pedo Pope who is infallible is ridiculous and heretical. Plus the fact that Rome constantly changes doctrine all the time. Look up how Vatican City became a country. It was gifted by Mussolini for the Pope supporting his Fascist government.
What you both fail to distinguish is that it can be both a work of God and a work of man. ONLY the former gives salvation. Therefore no particular instantiation of baptism as performed by a human is per se representative of salvation unless God blesses the baptism. Therefore, it is not to say that no act of baptism can save, but it's an important distinction to realize that the power ultimately and eternally depends on God's will which we as humans cannot dictate, even in instances where we assume with good reason that we're doing what it is he wants.
@@WalksandSuch seems an odd thing to say when it is a church that has BAPTIS(m)t in its identity. Seems to me that it was a "work" that Christ found worthy as did John the Baptist or they wouldn't have bothered with it.
When Jesus and Paul were talking about baptism though, they were referring to the baptism of the Spirit. A person believes and Holy Ghost baptized him to the body of Christ. It is the work of the Spirit. Not the water. Water has nothing to do with Christianity , it is old testament tradition slipped to New testament because of the traditionalist like Apostle Peter. Apostle Paul didn't emphasize on water baptism ,so didn't our Lord Jesus.
@@samt7785 Means is what God has chosen to use to work His Grace. He used dirt mixed with spit to wipe on the Blind Man's Eyes to Heal him. He used the Pole with the Serpent for the Israelites to look upon for healing. He used the Donkey to bring Christ into Jerusalem. He uses us to accomplish his purposes. He chose Water Baptism to communicate His Grace. He chooses Bread and Wine to communicate His Forgiveness and Grace to us. It's clear in Scripture. Don't let the fear of being "too Catholic" distract you from the clear Word of God.
“The Catholic Church is the only thing which saves a man from the degrading slavery of being a child of his age” ― G.K. Chesterton, The Catholic Church And Conversion
Jesus saves, not the Catholic church. We are Justified and forgiven of our sins when we put our faith in Jesus Christ and Him alone. Read Galatians 2 or the whole book of Galatians for that matter.
@@BryanOS As a Catholic, we believe what you just said. I think semantics comes into play when La Fe de la Iglesia used that quote. However, you need to understand that Jesus indeed established the Church, and thus the Church came form Him. Hence, when it says that the Church is what saves the man, it does ultimately mean that Jesus, who created the Church, is what saves the man. Just to clarify things :) God bless.
BMan wrong. Outside the Church there is no salvation. As the Ark saved Noah and his family through water, the Church saves it’s members through Jesus Christ.
James Powell No, sir. The ark of Noah is a representation of Christ Jesus. Everyone who is in Him will not perish, but will be saved. Jesus said that He's the way, the truth, & the life. Paul states in Galatians 2 that the works od the Law cannot make one righteous and justified before God. Our faith in Jesus Christ is what truly justifies us. John 3:16 states that whosoever BELIEVES in the SON will not PERISH, but have eternal life. Ask yourself, what made Abraham righteous before God? Was it the fact that he was circumcised? Was it his good works? No. He was made righteous because of His faith in God (Romans 4, Galatians 3). My friend, the Church cannot save. Those that have truly been forgiven and justified by placing their faith in Jesus Christ are the Church. The Church are the believers in Christ. The Church is not a building, traditions, systems, etc... The Church are the believers in Jesus Christ. My friend, I challenge you to give some thought to what I said. God bless.
James Powell There are plenty of people that go to church that are not saved. There are also plenty of saved people that don’t go to church for a number of reasons. Salvation comes from our acceptance of christ’s sacrifice for us. Not from attending a service or mass.
Wittenberg Project i mean in Europe the free churches identify themselves as Baptist’s. Idk why here they are so adamantly against their proper theological label. If your church teaches baptist theology it is baptist it doesn’t matter what strange name it calls itself
Francisco Bórquez K. Anabaptists are the mennonites , Amish, Hutterites,etc. Not the Baptist’s who split from the English separatist movement which split from Anglicanism.
Yes, Baptism is a work, but not our work. It is God's work. He baptizes us into the death and resurrection of our Lord Jesus and thereby forgives us our sins and gives us a new life.
M J - "Baptism is a work, but not our work. It is God's work." That is what we call a 'sacrament'. Very misunderstood by the Protestant Church, which wrongly accuses us of a host of egregious practices.
It is the work of Jesus (death & resurrection) which figures our sins & our faith given to us via the Holy Spirit which empowers us to new life & not the symbol of baptism.
Thanks for this video. I come from the Jehovahs witnesses community. I have been out for almost three years and do not want to join any church but I have started going to different churches just to see how they do things and it has been very enlightening. I really like the way you talk to people of different faiths and celebrate things they have in common and any differences. You have an amazing ability to interact with all kinds of people. Thanks for all you do
I know Im 3 years late to the party, but man I just gotta say it, what you're doing is awesome, your desire for honest exchange of ideas and new knowledge is admirable and the fact that you are documenting this process for us to see and learn along with you is something Im very thankfull for. God bless you and may the Holy Spirit guide you to The Truth
Another way to look at the Last Supper, the Communion is it is a Marriage contract. I know you are really big into history and research and maybe you have heard of this but one thing that gets left out of Easter service teachings is this. In Israel, the father and the groom to be would come to the family of the future bride. A contract would be offered, also known as the betrothal, at which point the young lady could refuse it. If she accepted it then the groom would break bread and share with her, and then they would share a cup of wine. The bread was to signify his providing for her and when they shared the wine, he would promise not to share wine again with any other until they were united in marriage. The father and groom then left and returned home at which point he would prepare a room for his wedding, a wedding chamber. While he did so, the father would gather food and drink in preparation for the wedding feast.....you see where this is going? There have been numerous studies done on this. At the last supper, Jesus, speaking to fellow Jews put it in terms that made sense to them. Hope this helps and provides a way of looking at events unfolding around them in a different and ultimately glorious way.
Can I please have references and links to this? This looks awesome and makes so much more sense when it comes to communion. I want to do more research.
I hadn’t heard this before but it makes sense. Christ gave His life for His bride, the Church. At every Mass, He gives Himself literally to the Church, and the faithful literally receive Him under the guise of bread and wine.
Wow, that's an awesome revelation. I've never seen it from that perspective before (mostly because I didn't know much about Jewish marriage rituals), but it makes perfect sense with what Jesus did and said. For the first time I understand why He said: Mat 26:29 NKJV "But I say to you, I will not drink of this fruit of the vine from now on until that day when I drink it new with you in My Father's kingdom." Thanks for that. If you have a resource or source that we can study this from in more detail that would be appreciated.
In John 6, the disciples left Jesus because they couldn't handle what Jesus was saying about the Eucharist, they couldn't believe he was saying eat his flesh...but Jesus didn't stop them from leaving by saying "oh wait, it was just a metaphor or symbol". The eucharist is real.
But John 6 does note confirm the fact that what the Lord said was physical in essence. There are ardent and ample room in the chapter to say that Jesus was speaking in spiritual terms. He said to those who were put down by his words ' The words I have spoken to you are spirit and they are life' so it has ample room to have a spiritual take on it .
@@2610paul but then Paul says you must discern the body and blood of the lord and ate not to take it unworthy. Doesn't sound like it is just a spiritual meaning. I appreciate your comment though
@@MajorWeakness I didn't read anything about people attempting to bite chunks of the Lord off like ravening dogs either. If they took it literally they probably would have. In any case I realize that was moderately sarcastic but the truth is Jesus is referred to as The Word many times in the Bible and when we hear his words we are in essence eating his body because his words were life. We eat the words with our minds, even "chew" them as we think about them and eventually incorporate the Lord (his character) into our bodies. The blood is also allegory to the Holy Spirit that was poured out on the day of Pentecost.
It takes great courage to step outside the comfort zone as well as stepping into something you thought would be comfortable, but with a different perspective. Your reverence for all the faith traditions has been so welcoming and dispels many of the misconceptions that we have painfully heard from those with closed minds and hearts, thinking theirs is the only way to Heaven. You have opened up an Ecumenical Door so few would have the courage to cross the threshold. As a Catholic, I consider you a brother in Christ. That is the bottom line.
Hi Matt! A non-catholic here possibly wanting to convert. I loved your spill at the end where you talked about how you could see how catholics feel so strongly about the eucharist by taking John 6 literally and then touched on how others read it as a metaphor. What is compelling me to see the "real presence" point of view is when it finally clicked for me that we are reading and interpreting the bible from a 16th century and beyond view point BUT that is not the way it is meant to be read. It is meant to be read through the eyes of a first century Jew because that was the audience Jesus was speaking to. And if you read it like that you realize that the last supper was a passover meal that jews did every year in "remembrance" of God saving his people in Exodus with the sacrifice of the lamb. The sacrifice was not complete by only killing the lamb and using the blood to mark the door but by EATING the lamb. At the last supper Jesus has taken his place as the new passover lamb whose blood is shed by the cross and whose flesh is to be eaten by his followers!! This was such a powerful point when I researched it; it blew me away. There is so much other language in the gospels that all foreshadow this. He calls himself "the bread of life", the mana that came down from heaven like in exodus. When he was born he was lain in a feeding trough.. It is just such a powerful theology to explore. Brant Pitre's book Jesus and the Jewish Roots of the Eucharist is a phenomenal read!
But Jews didn't drink the lamb's blood at Passover so your analogy doesn't work there. Please, before you go deep end into Catholicism, know the other things they believe first. Mary, the Saints, Papal infallibility, church tradition over the Bible--a man (pope's) word over God's word. I feel you in that we evangelicals have thrown off all ritual and liturgy to our detriments. Ritual and liturgy done well give us some anchor points to draw closer to one another as one body of brothers and sisters in Christ and understand/feel in a deeper way God's holiness and our own inadequacy.
I grew up Eve Free. At some point, I became Reformed. Then Lutheran for 10+ years. Due to life circumstances, I am back in an Eve Free style church. (Although, theologically, I’m still very Lutheran.) it’s very interesting to watch all these interviews. Also, I’ve attended Four different Lutheran churches, and none were as fancy as the one you toured with Will Weedon. One of them is Trinity Lutheran in Denver, if you’re ever in the area. An excellent confessional Lutheran church. Keep doing these videos. It’s so good to have all these Christians talking to one another and learning about each other.
Can you do a video of your testimony or your story of faith (whatever you'd prefer to call it?) herring you briefing talk about your journey after seminary definitely peeked my interest. (if you've already done one please direct me 😊)
You should check out the podcast Matt co-hosts with Destin from SmarterEveryDay. He's delved into that a bit in some of the episodes and it comes up from time to time You kind of get a behind-the-scenes look at who Matt really is. If you decide to give it a listen, I would suggest starting from the beginning. It's called "No Dumb Questions".
I was raised in a Hispanic evangelical Pentecostal church, And am currently not affiliated with any tradition but still in love with Christ and the Bible , Your video on the Eastern Orthodox Church has been very fascinating to me , have watched it countless times , very in awe of the beauty of that tradition and interested in continuing to learn about it although most of my doctrinal beliefs are leaning towards evangelical perspective
Javier Luyanda I’ve been in a similar position before becoming Catholic. My biggest pieces of advice would be 1) Read the Bible every day 2) Pray for Truth and Love every day 3) Visit other churches. Go to an Orthodox Church and a Catholic Church and ask the pastor some questions 4) Don’t ever stop looking for Truth and Love, no matter what. God will guide you
That video was helpful for me, a black former Pentecostal, in being interested in learning about Orthodoxy. I've been visiting an Orthodox church for the past month or so and I'm seriously considering joing the Orthodoxy. May the Lord guide you on your journey!
That’s great , I believe that there are true saved followers of Christ in nearly every denomination and sect however some are closer to the complete truth and original church Christ established then others ! I am definitely drawn to this branch of Orthodoxy however as a formal Protestant and Pentecostal have you come to terms with praying/venerating icons of saints ? And if so how? that’s my greatest barrier at the moment
@@javierluyanda2845 I have come to terms with those things. Here's the thing: As for prayer to saints, I keep in mind that the word "pray" does not inherently mean something that you do to a deity. Historically and etymologically, it has meant "to ask", hence, archaic terms like "pray tell" or "I pray thee". When Orthodox Christians and Catholics "pray to saints", they are not treating them as gods; they ask them to pray to God on their behalf, same way one would ask someone on earth to pray for them. I've come to conclude that it doesn't make sense to act like a person stops being part of the Church once they pass away - they go into the presence of God, and continue to pray to Him on behalf of His people. As for veneration, I notice that it gets conflated with "worship" a lot. Orthodox Christians affirm that there is only one worthy of worship: One God in Trinity, Trinity in Unity. When you worship something, you devote yourself entirely to your object of worship - Orthodox Christians give themself over to be united with God. To venerate is to treat something or someone deep respect, love, and honor, showing delight for what God has done. We give both worship and veneration to God, but we can venerate (not worship) things other than God. The Orthodox venerate saints because they are part of God's family, they are our older brothers and sisters in Christ and models of faith. To venerate a saint for example is to show happiness for what God has done through them. They kiss icons of saints because the icon serves as a reminder of our departed brothers and sisters in Christ, and to show respect for their image is to show respect for who the image depicts (they don't honor wood or paint or stone). It's like when a person salutes their nation's flag - they're not showing respect for a piece of fabric, but what the flag represents. It's something similar with icons. I feel it should also be noted that kissing and bowing are both forms of greeting and respect in many Eastern countries. Edit: I apologize for the block of text
This is my favorite "series" on youtube. I will watch every one you make. These discussions are so important to understanding other perspectives. To not being separate tribes but reaching across the aisle and saying, "Why do you believe that?" instead of, "This is what you should believe." Can't wait for more and I tell people to check these out all the time. Thanks!
James said "Faith without works is dead." My works is the evidence of my relationship with Jesus. Communion, baptism, giving to the poor, loving my brother as myself etc. It's the outward fruit of my faith. I do my works in thanksgiving to God.
Ephesians 2:8-9 KJV 8 For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God. 9 Not of works, lest any man should boast.
And Paul says "by grace you are saved through faith, not by works, so no man can boast". The question is what do we do with two seemingly contradictory verses?
As a Lutheran, it was amazing to hear someone explain their faith in a way that sounded so similar to Lutheranism. At the same time, Pastor Foote has a very different perspective on the ministry, what the Church is, and especially on worship. In my mind, it all sounds like the differences come from our different views on the sacraments. It was really interesting to see how those different views can cause such big differences in how we do church. Thanks so much for the video Matt!
Pretty sure he's wrong about them originally being Baptist and that the EFCA was actually formed out of a split from a Lutheran denomination, so it makes sense there would be some similarities. I believe the Lutheran roots are part of why they still accept infant baptism, for example.
Always interesting, you managed to have that open-minded "newcomer way" of asking questions even within your own tradition. Very beneficial for us the viewers.
Listening to the pastor, I finally realized Evangelicals use the Salvation by Grace through Faith formula, but Faith means belief for them, but Faith in the other traditions is a fidelity planted in the person by the Holy Spirit.
As a former evangelical who converted to the Lutheran church, I found this episode difficult to watch. I understand and know the language and theology presented because I was steeped in it from infancy. But this traditional almost made me walk away from Christ. I was lost and felt no assurance, when asking complex questions I was given very surface answers. How could I know I was saved if the fruit of my works was the only way to tell? Did that mean that if I did no good works than I must not be saved? These and other questions haunted me, I felt alone and adrift. Then in my brokenness I walked into a Lutheran church. I didn't even know what that meant at the time. It was there that I was taught that questioning traditions and beliefs was the cornerstone of the Christian faith. I was also given amazingly detailed answers to my questions and was encouraged to read more about where those answers came from. Volumes of books were given to me, along with thoughtful instruction. The implication that those that follow Church tradition don't question those traditions, or that those traditions don't stand up to questioning, absolutely boggles my mind.
I really love this video. It’s clear to me that you’ve been thinking about the Catholic/Orthodox Perspective on the role of the sacraments in comparison to this pastor’s perspective. Your questions were on point!
I would say a Presbyterian (OPC, RPCNA specifically) episode would be appropriate. You've gone High church and Low church. Time for some middle ground. Check into Tyler Presbyterian Church, , a Beautiful church, in Tyler Tx if you are ever interested.
i'm so happy that i stumbled across this channel the other day! i'm fascinated by christianity and its culture, i've been devouring these videos -- so excited for more!
Interested in Christian culture? You won't find anything as rich and ancient as the Catholic Church. Our celebrations and forms of worship actually pre-date Jesus Christ in some cases!!
jimmyintheswamp i would disagree, if you go back in history you won’t find the Modern Roman Catholic Church, you would find the Orthodox Church, Roman Catholicism separated front the true church in 1054. In the first century the theology looks more Protestant in some aspects too. Read the church fathers
@@Solideogloria00 I'm steeped in the Church Fathers. Justin Martyr (can 150) is the earliest non-scriptural source related to the celebration of the Mass. Have you ever attended a traditional Latin Mass? Nothing about it is Protestant. As far as history is concerned, why do so many of the Fathers take Roman primacy as a given? And why was Constantinople dubbed "the new Rome"? There is too much to cover here. Just know that I continue to pray for Christian unity as is the command of our Lord Jesus Christ 🙏
You may think you are not religious because you have not accepted Jesus Christ as your Lord and Savior, BUT you do worship something. What is that thing? Money? Prestige? The Internet? Not passing Judgement, but this is something you should ask yourself. Even if you feel like you are not "worshiping" that "thing," what is your time and adoration put to? God Bless you and your family!
Love these videos AND reading the comments. You do such a good job of encouraging, mostly, friendly debate. There are a few outliers, but overall people are doing a good job of talking through what they believe. Oh wait, maybe I should type it like this because it is more important: LOVE THESE VIDEOS AND READING THE COMMENTS! I mean that should mean I'm automatically right, it's in all caps.
Great video Matt. --> One quick observation: Protestants Pastors often say: I think, I believe, or I feel. Where as the Orthodox or Catholic Priests will say: We think, We believe, We feel.
I think that has to do with how they view their authority, a protestant pastor says I think because that's the conclusion he/she came to and they can show you how they got there but ultimately is up to you to decide if you agree with them. Where as with a Catholic or Orthodox church understanding it's we because the church is the authority and if you don't agree then you're wrong.
That is because the Roman CHURCH HAS TO FOLLOW THE LEADERSHIP OR THEY CAN BE ASKED TO LEAVE. TO THE R.C.s that means they are not regarded as believers then , as they are converted to their denomination .Much the same as a cult that say we are right and all others wrong.
True but you will also find lots of protestant pastors saying "I think" the same things. For example Presbyterians hold fast to the Westminister Confession of Faith (I could be wrong but I'm pretty sure), and many other Protestants hold many of the same values.
@@wendymitchell8245 Not trying to argue as that is not my purpose, but I did just want to point out that Jesus, Paul and the other apostles did point out if there is some differences involve, you ultimately talk/discuss about it to the church. Jesus said if a brother sins against you, you tell him his fault. If that doesn't work, bring one or two with you. Then if he yet refuses, you tell it to the Church. We believe as Christians that it's not just I, but it's a relationship between God and I, and with that in mind, loving your neighbor comes into play, as we can also see God in other people. Hence, it's not I, but _we_ as the Church. Matthew 18:15-20 The Catholic Church indeed follows a leadership, but not the leadership of what you think, which is a misconception. We indeed follow Jesus, as He is the head and we are the body. The head and the body are connected, therefore it's a relationship, and a relationship isn't "me, myself, and I", but rather it's _we_ together. 1 Colossians. May God Bless you sister!
It's interesting to note that the pastors' upbringing is the pastors' 'tradition', which gives him his understanding of the Bible. And that is true of all denominations - there is a 'tradition' which surrounds their interpretation of Scripture. The great difference is that the Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox Church both share the same 'tradition'. And that tradition was the only one that came together and through the Holy Spirit defined what would and would not be called the Bible. It is the writings the Apostolic and Early Church Fathers left behind and have survived that guides our understanding of the Bible and what the Early Church was like. Some great reformists even attempted to have certain writings removed from what we know today as being the Word of God because they failed to fall in line with the new doctrines they were promoting. This, with all due respect, is the problem I have with Protestantism.
TheReWilliamWhite - Martin Luther wanted to remove James, Jude, Hebrews and Revelations. The reformers chose to remove the Deuterocanonical books which include 7 Old Testament books along with portions of Esther and Daniel. These seven books include many of the clearest prophecies of Jesus’ birth, death and resurrection. Interesting fact: they also describe Hanukkah.
@@amandah8178 - you're exactly right. The reformers wanted anything that didn't sit well with their theology to be removed, and as you pointed out, they were successful in doing so to a great degree. Modern day Protestants don't look at this fact to see how manipulative the Protestant side of the Church was and is. They point the finger at Catholicism (Roman and Eastern Orthodox) and claim they have EXTRA books. It's not that we have extra books, it's that we still have the original books of the Bible as compiled by those that were guided by the Holy Spirit.
leavesnpetals Which is something I never knew until I started researching the early church! I spoke with a Protestant pastor who was taught in seminary that there were two Bibles, a Catholic and a Protestant one since the time of Christ. 🧐 I definitely thought that Catholics had ‘extra’ books until I learned the truth.
Thank you for talking about evangelicals , it has been taken to mean extreme points of view and Jeff had a brilliant take on it . Keep up the fantastic work!
Hey! I really love this series because as a busy Catholic, I don’t get much time to learn about other faiths. There is one big point I would encourage you to delve further with. This pastor insists that to be initiated in the Church, you just have to accept Christ and Baptism doesn’t really matter beyond being a nice ceremony. Where is this in the Bible? Jesus insists that we must be reborn by water and spirit. Water and spirit. Paul and Peter both insist this, so why did the Evangelical tradition abandon that over 1500 years later? God doesn’t change. Throughout the Bible, he begins new things with Spirit and water. Genesis, the Spirit hovers over the water. The dove, representing the Spirit hovered over the water before the ark. There are several more examples of this! Christ Himself didn’t need to be Baptized, but he did it as a model for us. He is Baptized, and the Spirit comes down above him as the dove. Christ insists that to be saved we must be Baptized!
In the Catholic tradition, Baptism is a rebirth of spirit by the water. God know what works best, so he’s going to do it the same every time. Accepting Christ as your personal Savior is a Baptist tradition, yet they reject tradition and believe in Sola Scriptura. Keep up the good work! I can see the gears turning in your head as you learn about these different faiths. I’ll be praying for you!
I would point to Abraham being justified by faith, or the beggar on the cross who didn't do all these things and he was still saved (according to Jesus). I know, especially for the beggar you would say he didn't have the chance to do it and therefore it didn't matter, however that is an argument from silence that I don't think has enough wight for me personally.
Matt your videos are awesome.Such a great tool for people who have very little idea what various Christian denominations believe.As a Catholic I find these videos so interesting.
Hi, Matt! I think your videos about different forms of Christianity are amazing! I'm from Slovenia, a predominantly Catholic country, where we never learnt about other forms of Christianity, but since I always wanted to learn more about them, I'm really glad that I found your videos. I'm learning a lot from them :) Will you also present Lutherans, please?
Your channel is one of my favorite Internet discoveries ever! I’m so grateful for the analysis and history you present, and I especially love this series. I’ve really enjoyed learning about these different denominations with you. As the series continues, maybe you could continue branching out into religions that aren’t Christianity. Historically, there’s been a lot of hurt and misunderstanding between us and people who come from other belief systems. It would be so refreshing and healing to see you engage in the open listening and discussion you do on this channel with people of other faiths.
Thank you Aaron! I absolutely intend to do exactly what you're suggesting, and I appreciate your patience with me in advance as I bumble through asking questions of people I know even less about. Hopefully it will be received with the grace with which it is intended.
25:10 "Well I like how you said nail it down..." Me: thinks an awkward metaphor about Jesus being nailed to the cross is incoming. "Because it all goes back to Luther, you know? With the theses..." Me: Oh thank goodness.
As a 67 year-old Catholic, I have come to the view that the Catholic church elevates the Eucharist at the expense of the Gospel. If I try speak to other Catholics about this, they get very defensive. I have even been told by our choir director that the Eucharist is the center of our faith. I am sorry, but I cannot agree with that. I look at St. Paul and as far as I can tell approximately 98% of Paul's letters revolve around faith in Christ's atonement ("but we preach Christ crucified") and what that means in our lives; less than 1% refers to the Eucharist. This can't be an accident. The Eucharist is incredibly important especially when it points to Christ's sacrifice, but the Eucharistic celebration has, IMO, supplanted the proclamation of the Gospel. Thanks for this video. It is very refreshing to hear other Christian views.
Brother, they're equally important. The mass is divided in two: the liturgy of the word and liturgy of the Eucharist. Both are Christ. As the word is Christ and so is the Eucharist. I'm sorry that you feel that way, but even the structure of the mass indicates they're equal as they're both Christ and inseparable from who he is. Blessings to you!!!
@@learningtogrow3535 I do not think there is a point of debating this issue with you. I was trying to point out that the preaching of the Gospel has suffered at the hands of believers who think the Eucharist is the end-all. Look at it this way: Why isn't the Catholic church - my Church - overflowing with Grace and holy people? After all, it is the one Church (Orthodox excepted) that champions Holy Communion more that any other. The answer, IMO: Because you have to believe in the Gospel first. Your argument is theoretical, but it is not based on reality. I see a Church that is suffering from a certain deficiency, and you are trying to tell me that it is alright.
I can see where you are coming from. Sometimes in the richness and beautiful of the faith, people forget what is really important. It's not the doctrine on the Eucharist or how it is celebrated that is the centre of our faith- it's the Eucharist itself-- Jesus. The Eucharist is the centre of our faith, because the Eucharist is Jesus, and Jesus is the centre. It's not your choir director's opinion; this is the teaching of the Church. The Mass is a re-presentation of Jesus' sacrifice--- that *is* the Gospel, is it not? That God created us for a relationship with Him, the relationship was broken by sin, and through Jesus, restored again through His sacrifice? The Eucharist being elevated at the expense of the Gospel is not the problem. The problem is that people go to church and go through the motions without understanding the faith, or believing. They aren't catechized, or they are catechized but not evangelized. Why isn't the Church overflowing with grace and holy people? It is. However, we need to respond to God's grace. And as the Bible warns us, it is possible to receive communion without discerning the body of Christ. God works in wonderous ways. The Eucharist, as others have mentioned, is God's work. I rarely went to church as a child. At the first Mass I remember attending, perhaps at 10 years old, I didn't understand what was going on. But during the liturgy of the Eucharist, I felt such a strong sense of God's presence that I would call it my first "conversion". After that, I was compelled to learn more about the faith & Jesus.
I was born into a Catholic family by devout parents and grandparents. Like yourself, I have my moments of criss in my faith journey with Jesus. But Jesus keeps finding a way to call me, and more deeply each time. Now I am experiencing a crisis of where to worship to deepen my journey within a community of believers who are all about love, relationship, and faith. Thank you so much for your series. It's really me in discerning where God wants me to be. It is beautiful that despite all of the doctrinal issues, we we seem to all have Jesus' love for us as the heart. Again, thanks. Still searching, "still haven't found what I am looking for." Praying day and night for God's gentle, guiding voice, and His silence.
I loved how you mentioned at the end how this discussion landed on Catholic or Orthodox ears. It feels like this is one of only a handful of channels that acknowledges that Catholicism is a sect of Christianity, and I appreciate how I can learn about other sects in such a friendly environment. God bless you Matt!
The important point is, what is the gospel ,how do you become a Christian ,as the church is only a group of Christians. PETER PREACHED BELIEVE ,REPENT AND BE BAPTISED,and CONTINUE IN THE APOSTLES DOCTRINE. THE ROMAN church teaches you are made a Christian by a priest putting water on a babies head . In other words it is a ritual someone is put through without their knowledge .Most of these people do not grow up to become true believers.
Wendy Mitchell In the covenant with Israel, circumcision was required for salvation. It was done by the parents to start the child’s life on the right track. It’s mentioned multiple times in scripture that Baptism is the new circumcision. Same principles apply. Also, Our blessed Lord tells Nicodemus in St. John’s gospel that unless you are born again of water and spirit you cannot enter the kingdom of God. That’s just a small taste of a defense of the older view of baptism.
Matt, thank you for taking the time to make these incredible and informative videos. As a once card carrying Calvary Chapel member now become a Catholic, I completely understand the language your guest is speaking. Before I became a Catholic I took my faith for granted in the sense that I didn't question the Bible or God's ministers. Your guest brought up many familiar aspects of my days in the Evangelical Protestant church; the Bible being our sole authority in matters of faith, beliefs, and morals. Another aspect being the priesthood of all believers and the person's individual assent to belief in Christ. If the Bible is the supreme authority (to Protestants) and Saint Paul when he is referencing the Scriptures in his Epistles he's talking about the Old Testament, how then do Protestants include the New Testament books as Scripture while denying the Church its rightful place in determining thru the Holy Spirit which books are to be canon? Matt, you mentioned that some people are attracted to pre-1500s thought while others are attracted to post 1500s thought and that'll determine where they may end up within the greater Christian spectrum; altho that may hold some truth, I think it's painting with a very broad brush. I mean, within the first few centuries of Christianity, what did the Christians have as options for their individual tastes? Or what options of thought did they have to choose from? If someone went too far with a particular belief, who's to say that was going too far? Did the Church operate only as individual communities tied together by a common belief or did the Church also operate as a living organism sharing with one another a core belief and when the Church got together to settle a dispute over some beliefs or practices did She not settle it with a Council? Has this not been the Church's practice in settling things once and for all? What Church today do we see that continues to hold councils that are binding upon its members and shapes the course of the Church? The guest states that if the Eucharist and Baptism conferred any grace then he'd have those two ordinances everytime at church services but said that he doesn't believe it to be so therefore he doesn't have them done everytime yet holds them to be very important. It's very much this type of thinking that is a Hallmark of Protestantism, i.e. the elevated opinion of the individual to interpret Scripture of their own liking. If Scripture is so plain to understand then why did Martin Luther find opposition from his other Protestant Reformation comrades and ultimately splinter into many various branches? Matt, Lutheranism holds to Baptismal Regeneration but I'm certain that your guest would not. Where does the list of majors and minors go and how far? Who's to say what are the majors and minors? I'm certain that a Catholic and Orthodox Christians would have many similarities but so too many differences that they'd consider to be of utmost importance which would be the same amongst Protestant Christians. So who's to say? I apologize for rambling on! I'm not trying to get into a theological debate because honestly I'm not one to do well in such circumstances and God hadn't given me a mind of a theologian. 🤙😊 Pax Christi.
I love the Autumn Colors ...all good points Autumn, unfortunately the nature of a “free”church is that it can splinter into thousands of interpretations, based on individual interpretation and opinion. That is the beauty of higher churches, that interpretation is done by the collective ensuring that it is well reasoned and researched.
Thank you for another good conversation. I am deeply appreciative of how respectful you are of other religious traditions. I love how you encourage your guests to describe their doctrines on their own merits, and not how they stand in opposition to other traditions. Wonderful ecumenical offerings. Thanks!!
Thank you for doing this series. One follow-up question: if, as a Protestant, you believe the Reformation was an effort to get back to the roots of the Church before us Catholics messed everything up, how do you view issues where the clear consensus in the writings of the early Church fathers favors the Catholic/Orthodox position? For example, the Eucharist is frequently described as the actual body and blood of Christ in these writings. Examples: "I have no taste for corruptible food nor for the pleasures of this life. I desire the Bread of God, which is the flesh of Jesus Christ, who was of the seed of David; and for drink I desire his blood, which is love incorruptible." - Ignatius of Antioch, Letter to the Romans 7:3, early second century "[T]he food which has been made into the Eucharist by the Eucharistic prayer set down by Him, and by the change of which our blood and flesh is nourished, is both the flesh and the blood of that incarnated Jesus." - Justin Martyr, First Apology 66, mid second century "When, therefore, the mixed cup and the baked bread receives the Word of God and becomes the Eucharist, the body of Christ, and from these the substance of our flesh is increased and supported, how can they say that the flesh is not capable of receiving the gift of God, which is eternal life -- flesh which is nourished by the body and blood of the lord." - Irenaus of Lyons, Against Heresies 5:2:2-3, late second century
As a protestant, I actually do believe in the presence of Christ in the Lord's Supper and think it should be celebrated more often. But I do think I am a rarity, especially being a Charismatic non-denominational Christian.
Just a thought on John 6, yeah, Jesus might be talking about Him being the bread of life as a metaphor. But as compared to his other statements "I am the way..." "I am the gate.." this particular statement seemed to bother a lot of his followers in fact, some of them said that it's a hard teaching. And a few verses later, some actually stopped following him. I mean, if it was just a simple metaphor and all, why would they react like that?
@@michaelratnam1983 Good point. I was raised Protestant but am currently in the process of converting to Catholoicism. Another thing that struck me when researching this was the specific language used. The greek word used for "eat" is more accurately translated as "chew" or "gnaw" and I find it interesting that Jesus was so specific in using that word.
This is what led me home to the Catholic Church. My Protestant pastor was quoting John 6 during communion one Sunday and it hit me that either Jesus was lying or I was wrong about communion merely being a symbol. A couple months later the Holy Spirit was introducing me to the Catholic Church and two years after that I received the Eucharist for the first time!
Stephen Unato good way of stating the question, it’s what’s in those few verses that mattered so greatly the the Jewish audience. It was the phrase “came down from Heaven” which first invited grumbling (see v. 41), and Jesus expressly used the phrase again in v. 58 to press the issue. Keep in mind that He was trying not to maintain a subscriber base, but to weed out those who would not follow Him for who He was. The turning away near the end of the passage is in direct response to “no one can come to me unless it has been granted him from the Father” in v. 65. As in every other gospel passage showing friction with the establishment tradition, Jesus’ claim of divinity and endorsement by the Father are the stumbling block that Israel could not accept. In any case this was pretty early in Jesus’ ministry and the communion would not be administered for a long while yet, don’t really see how it could be made a dealbreaker issue so prematurely and divorced from the context of His teachings at that point in the game, seems that the bread imagery was a theme which served to underscore the main point here and again later on.
New Darganism - this leads to the real question in all of this, which is the question of authority. The Church, established by Jesus and protected by the Holy Spirit, has stated for 2000 years that the Eucharist is the Body and Blood of Jesus, that John 6 is literal. However, you disagree. I don’t mean this flippantly or disrespectfully, but what authority do you have to say that the Church has been in error for the last 2000 years? Catholics are criticized for following Tradition, the Magisterium and Scripture, which were established by Jesus when He established His Church. However, you say that we should follow your interpretation and disregard 2000 years of consistent belief over communion. Why do you hold more authority? Again, I ask this with all sincerity. Something else to examine is the way that Jesus is setting the scene to establish the Real Presence Of Himself in the Eucharist. Right before this dialogue, He multiplies the bread and flesh of the fish in order to feed the people. He reminds them of the manna that God sent down from heaven, that would sustain them. It’s at THIS point that He says, “Unless you eat My flesh and drink My blood, you have no life within you... I am the manna sent down from heaven.” The feeding of the 5000 is not just an isolated miracle but an intentional act of Christ to lead us to understanding the Eucharist because He divides Himself to feed and sustain everyone who partakes of Him.
Why, i received the H.S.when i prayed the sinners prayer at 6 years now 66, its the start of being a Christian but its the only start. We are still called to sacntification by obedience and good works see Titus.
Thanks for doing the hard work of actually listening, Matt. Even when it's your own tradition! :-) What an amazing thing it is to hear through "new ears." I too had that experience with this interview. I spent many years in the EFCA, and evangelical tradition that has so many strengths. However, my current faith path has me pilgriming in the "Land Episcopal," so I'm hearing things from a different perspective at this point in my life, and that's not bad at all. Here's to change and growth!
You are serving the Lord in such a unique way, Matt! I LOVE the delivery of your videos, and even more so, the things that I LEARN from them. Thank you thank you thank you!!
Every single Church Father from the early Church professed the real presence in the Eucharist, the necessity of Baptism, and the necessity of the order of Bishops.
God bless you my friend. Love the channel; credit to your faith, curiosity and work ethic! And I must say, this video made me more hopeful than ever that your appreciation of history might eventually bring you home to the historical faith. :)
@@njohn6995 Of course catholics believe in Jesus. Just like faith without works is dead, works without faith is dead too. How does a wife know her husband loves her and vice versa? By just saying they love each other or by the actions they do to show each other the love they have? Both are needed for a marriage to work. It is the same with our love for God. The works we do is out of love, not to earn favor.
For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast. For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them. Ephesians 2:8-10
Hey Matt, love your videos. Totally help me grow in my own faith. But I'mma challenge you on one thing. You can think about it and come to your own conclusion - Baptism is not a work of man; baptism is a work that God does to men. It's like, if I'm washing my dishes it's not the dishes doing the work, it's me. Same with God washing us. God bless!
@@MathewAlden I don't like high,low or middle church. I just want a good iturgical service. I want to worship the same way the saints before me worshiped. As close as the first Chrisitans did. I don't mind a newer hymn now and again but the modern 'worship' music can stay in my car for the commute.
I’ve been watching your UA-cam clips, or as you say you’re 10 minute hour. This stuff is really been interesting. I’ve viewed several of them and watching this one it was pretty good. It was heading home. I felt I guess the word I want to say it’s comfortable and what he was saying. So with all of them that I’ve watched Catholic and protestant and all of that I just want to say thank you. It’s a different look a different perspective and it actually helps me to appreciate where I stand and what I believe. I also truly believe the Lord knows what’s in our hearts, and that helps us to set where we’re at. Keep up the good work and again thank you very much.
There was, hidden in his style of delivery, so much incredible wisdom and grace it is stunning. This has been my favorite conversation you’ve had, and should be rewatched by all, especially Protestants. He delivered such wisdom and truth with such gentleness, full of understanding and grace. My husband and I had to stop and rewind and talk every few minutes. We both marveled at his ability to communicate gently without compromising, and both came away saying “I wish I could do that”. But watching videos like this is part of learning it. THANK YOU so much, Matt. So valuable. I was also afraid that a grizzly was going to rush the deck and eat you. Clear out some of those trees so you can see them coming. And I hope you find that coffee cup behind you before it gets all moldy.
I was secretly hoping that some cool animal I would walk by as we were talking as well. One of these days something awesome like that is going to happen oh, and I'm just going to leave it there in the background of the video. I'm really happy you resonated with this one Jennifer, and I really appreciate that you and your husband seem to consistently get what I'm going for with these conversations.
Love these talks mate!! You’re very good at it! I haven’t finished the full interview yet! But I can’t help but notice that most of the time you ask a theological question the pastor begins with “I think...” I guess “HIS” understanding and interpretation of scripture is what his theology is based upon.
@@EssenceofPureFlavor hi my friend. Of course I think things. The point I was trying to make is that every time the pastor is asked a theological question he always answers with “I think” or “I believe” etc etc. he is his own authority; and whatever interpretation of the bible he comes up with is his truth. That’s not the way Christianity was set up. Hope that made sense. Take care and God bless.
7:40. This is where this pastor perfectly shows where he gets the sacrements/ordinances wrong. It's not a covenant "we" made or are making. It's a covenant God made, and is keeping. It's not to show what we believe or have done. It's to show what God has done and is doing. And that's how it's been since Genesis 15.
A covenant is an agreement. God offered the covenant, but it is up to us to accept it. It is not unilateral, it is bilateral, but is impossible without God's initiation. Being baptized and taking communion are outward signs of obedience to God's commands and they acknowledge God's actions that bring salvation. They are not necessary for salvation. Remember the thief on the cross with Jesus. He was saved without either.
@@drkenshaw It is not unilateral, it is bilateral, once the covenant is entered into ...... but it is highly asymmetric. Only one of the parties can initiate the covenant, God, and that is His choice to do so. Only one of the parties can keep the covenant perfectly, God. Only one of the parties can hold the covenant together, God, despite the fact that we often break the terms of it. That is why the sacraments are symbols of what God has done, not anything that we do. God does the washing (baptism), and God does the blood shedding (communion).
I have rejected evangelicals because of their emphasis on nationalism, morality etc... I thank this Pastor for clarifying his view on those issues! For me it is was and always is the gospel of Christ Jesus. 🙏
Evangelical is an international interdenominational theologically label that most of U.S.-American secular media mistakes for a political ideology due to the Republican Party desperately trying to convince Evangelicals to vote for them in exchange for maintaining socially conservative (cultural conservative) values (which they don’t even do a good job of) and Pew Research Center in their survey data nomenclature reinforcing the false Evangelical vs People of Color (POC) dichotomy where they split Evangelicals (who are multicultural/diverse) into Evangelical (erroneously synonymized with White Evangelical), Black Protestant (combing both Black Evangelicals and Black Mainline Protestants into one undifferentiated category making it difficult for the general public/media to compare without access to raw data due to non-matching variables brought about by not providing data or survey questions differentiating between Black Evangelicals and Black Mainline Protestants although many of the most prominent Historically and Majority Black denominations being Evangelical in theology), and ignoring other POC Evangelicals or combing them with Pew’s mostly White-Normative defined “Evangelical” category. The thing is it’s mostly White Evangelicals that vote Republican (a good chunk of them being conservative on social and economic issues or are single-issue social conservative voters that believe that economic issues take a back seat over social) while Black Evangelicals tend to vote Democratic (although they mostly hold socially conservative values, and theologically conservative beliefs, they tend to be economically progressives because they actively feel the effects of being on the lower end of the socioeconomic totem-pole). If Pew splits the data into White Evangelical, Black Evangelical, Other Evangelical, White Mainline, Black Mainline, Other Mainline, and Confessing Movement and then regrouped White, Black, and Other Evangelicals into the Evangelical category, it would drop the prevalence of Evangelicals voting Republican (Political Conservative) down to an extent within their data because it will correct for the missing Black Evangelical data (that was combined with Black Mainline to create the undifferentiated Black Protestant variable) that voted Democrat (Political Liberal/Progressive).
James 2:19 - You say you have faith, for you believe that there is one God. Good for you! Even the demons believe this, and they tremble in terror. Acts 2:28 - Peter replied, “Each of you must repent of your sins and turn to God, and be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins. Then you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. Matthew 7:21 - “Not everyone who calls out to me, ‘Lord! Lord!’ will enter the Kingdom of Heaven. Only those who actually do the will of my Father in heaven will enter.
@@petervandermeij -You are not stupid. I do understand him saying that while it is entirely and only by God's grace that we are saved, that salvation becomes interactive. There are responsibilities God places on the believer. Obeying these is not what saves us, but having faith is more than merely believing the way we define believing today. Faith is also obedience. And without that obedience we do not have saving faith. If it were merely believing the demons would be saved as they see Him face to face and therefore believe. Living up to our responsibility as a believer is not a 'saving work'. It is the fruit of a saving faith.
I didn’t think this would be interesting, but it totally was. I, like you, have an evangelical background. I’ve mainly grown up in Baptist churches, but also Ev Free. In the past 6 or so years, I’ve been searching out other traditions, mainly Presbyterian, Anglican, and Methodist, which has really helped flesh out my understanding of God and church history and tradition. So hearing you dive deep with an evangelical pastor was both nostalgic and also made me think. I hadn’t realized it, but I still hold that “major on the majors, and minor in the minors” viewpoint, which I do think is a good way of looking at things. I don’t even think I knew where that phrase came from, but it’s something I’ve heard many times in my upbringing. Anyway, thank you for these videos and I hope you continue doing them! It’s rare to find such thoughtful honest discussions about denominational differences.
"If evangelicalism means behavioralism, moralism, nationalism, which the connotation has certainly become that, then I'm not an evangelical. If evangelicalism means the gospel is true, the Bible is true, people need Jesus to change us from the inside out, not by good works but by faith and the gift of His grace, then I'm an evangelical."
Such an amazing quote, I had to write it down.
I agree, that was the absolute highlight of the interview for me.
I'm saving it now to!
Me too. It made my heart happy to hear that so well stated.
But what does the Bible say?
31 “When the Son of Man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, then he will sit on his glorious throne. 32 Before him will be gathered all the nations, and he will separate people one from another as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats. 33 And he will place the sheep on his right, but the goats on the left. 34 Then the King will say to those on his right, ‘Come, you who are blessed by my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world. 35 For I was hungry and you gave me food, I was thirsty and you gave me drink, I was a stranger and you welcomed me, 36 I was naked and you clothed me, I was sick and you visited me, I was in prison and you came to me.’ 37 Then the righteous will answer him, saying, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you drink? 38 And when did we see you a stranger and welcome you, or naked and clothe you? 39 And when did we see you sick or in prison and visit you?’ 40 And the King will answer them, ‘Truly, I say to you, as you did it to one of the least of these my brothers,[a] you did it to me.’ (Matthew 25:31-40)
The sheep are saved by what they did.
14 "What good is it, my brothers, if someone says he has faith but does not have works? Can that faith save him? 15 If a brother or sister is poorly clothed and lacking in daily food, 16 and one of you says to them, “Go in peace, be warmed and filled,” without giving them the things needed for the body, what good[a] is that? 17 So also faith by itself, if it does not have works, is dead.
18 But someone will say, “You have faith and I have works.” Show me your faith apart from your works, and I will show you my faith by my works. 19 You believe that God is one; you do well. Even the demons believe-and shudder! 20 Do you want to be shown, you foolish person, that faith apart from works is useless? 21 Was not Abraham our father justified by works when he offered up his son Isaac on the altar? 22 You see that faith was active along with his works, and faith was completed by his works; 23 and the Scripture was fulfilled that says, “Abraham believed God, and it was counted to him as righteousness”-and he was called a friend of God. 24 You see that a person is justified by works and not by faith alone. 25 And in the same way was not also Rahab the prostitute justified by works when she received the messengers and sent them out by another way? 26 For as the body apart from the spirit is dead, so also faith apart from works is dead." (James2:14-26)
Faith without works is dead.
12 "And I saw the dead, great and small, standing before the throne, and books were opened. Then another book was opened, which is the book of life. And the dead were judged by what was written in the books, according to what they had done." (Revelation 20:12)
They were judged according to what they had done.
6 "He will render to each one according to his works: 7 to those who by patience in well-doing seek for glory and honor and immortality, he will give eternal life; 8 but for those who are self-seeking[a] and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness, there will be wrath and fury." (Romans 2:6)
According to their works.
34 "A new commandment I give unto you, That ye love one another; as I have loved you, that ye also love one another.
35 By this shall all men know that ye are my disciples, if ye have love one to another." (John 13:34-35)
Love!
13 "So now faith, hope, and love abide, these three; but the greatest of these is love." (1 Corinthians 13:13)
First come Grace, totally unwarranted and undeserved, then Faith, but if the Faith has no Works it is dead, so Grace, Faith, Works and lastly, Love, of God and of each other, amen.
God bless :o)
Interview Scott Hahn 🤔
As a Catholic, you're definitely my favorite protestant youtuber
It's honestly a very meaningful and humbling compliment Jack. Thank you.
Absolutely! I appreciate the humility and eagerness with which you have approached all of these conversations. Keep up the good work!
@@MattWhitmanTMBH Agreed but still waiting on you to dissect the early Church Fathers statements on the Eucharist
Amen!
Chris R I hope he does! The early church fathers help me be convinced that the body and blood is present in the Eucharist
"The Ten Minute Bible Hour" and "The Bible Project" are probably the two best things on the internet! Thank you for all the time you invest to make these happen!
Let me just edit this...*removes* "the bible project" there we go 👍
@@chupie3085 you should check them out. They're a very talented group of Christians who teach biblical stories and the gospel, the good news, with top notch animation.
You may like "Crosspaint" then
@@ljackson4574 just looked them up and watched their most recent video. Very impressed! Learned a lot. Thank you for reccomending them to me. 😀
I have quite a few Christian content creators that I fallow and I'm always happy to add more.
S. Earl what’s wrong with the Bible project? I have learned SO much from their podcast and their UA-cam videos are incredible
"We're not saved by good works, but we're certainly saved for good works" GREAT QUOTE!
As a Roman Catholic I so appreciate your videos and interviews. I have Southern Baptist relatives. Please do a video so I can help understand my family.
Thank you! I absolutely intend to do a video with the southern Baptists.
I have attended both Southern Baptist and Evangelical Free Church's and find virtually no theological difference.
@@davewil3 I think the only difference would be church government and structure.
@@JesseBrohinsky , but I dont even see a difference there. Both are congregational. I haven't identified a structure difference.
Fried Chicken and casserole dishes is the main doctrines.
Before, I couldn’t stand hearing about different Christian denominations, but now that I’m taking world religions and watching Matt, I can appreciate them without sacrificing my Catholic beliefs.
Some have already mentioned this, but for the sacramental traditions, the sacraments, particularly focusing on baptism and the Lord’s Supper, are not works. They are not something we do; they are something that God does to us. God is the primary actor, not us. We receive by faith (which is here a position of dependence, not intellectual assent, so even infants can have faith as they are utterly dependent).
This is a good discussion though. I enjoy thoughtful theological dialogue, even when I disagree in some places.
Not trying to be mean or anything but isn't marriage considered a sacrament too? And one that is done from one partner to another? I know that doesn't take away from your point there, but that also wasn't the purpose.
Jokel marriage takes 3! Husband, Wife, and God!
Disagree, and here is why:
Jesus says "Take this in remembrance of me". Both tanking and remembering are actions that the user takes in his/her own life. Therefore they are works. If you wanted to argue that after the action by the user (aka works), that the holy spirit then does something to us in return then great (I think there is plenty of scripture to back that up), make that point. But the initial action is a work which is why its not required in order to be a christian.
God can only be the primary actor if he is literally forcing us to do the action. If we have freewill (or any sway what so ever) on a specific decision then we are the primary actor(s). Im not gonna open the can of worms on freewill vs pre determination any further...
The only 'action' or 'work' on our part (according to the catholic understanding) in the Sacraments is prayer. In the case of the Eucharist, we pray to God in Faith, that by His Grace, He becomes present for us behind the outward appearance of bread and wine, we do this according to His commandment in Scripture. I have been (Anglican) protestant and now Catholic, both traditions which have sacraments, and it never really occurred to me that the Sacraments were works (I always thought that other practices of the Catholic Church would be closer to this criticism of being 'works').
@@chrismcaulay7805 But what happens if these "actions" are done because of the faith we have in God, do you still consider that as "works"?
Please visit a Presbyterian, Mennonite, Methodist, Baptist, Pentecostal and a Neopentecostal !!! Greetings from Guatemala!
Yes! These would all be fascinating to see!
Don't forget the Charismatic churches which are linked to the Pentecostal branch of the tree which come out of Evangelical branch but are slightly different.
I go to church that comes from a Pentecostal background but is now non denominational
“Knowledge of the Gospel and surrender to the Gospel are not the same thing” AMEN!!! That moment I gave my life to Christ, trusted Him, surrendered ALL to Him, repented for all sins and asked for forgiveness, was and will always be the most amazing moment of my life, to receive the gift of eternal life through Jesus Christ, to be born again and baptized, to know the Holy Spirit in dwells in me and convicts me and guides me, God is SO good, His mercy, His love, His forgiveness, thank you Jesus Christ my Lord and Saviour!!!! I love you LORD!!
Matt, you've done it again! These dialogues are great. Speaking as a Catholic, I'm happy that we're getting around to the traditions that are much different from my own. It's good to hear people who disagree with me talk about their beliefs freely, guard down. It really gets me going.
However, there is something Jeff articulated well, but that I disagree with. I think he's very articulate and clear when describing how each believer must come to understand scripture as the supreme authority. Makes total sense. But, and here's what I don't quite understand, if you're trying to figure out what's scripture and what isn't, don't you need a pre-existing basis upon which to judge that? For example, if I'm looking at the Gospel of John and wondering if it's inspired, doesn't that presuppose that I've already been taught what's been revealed by Christ so as to judge whether John lines up with that? This basis that pre-exists scripture and subsequently tracks alongside it is just what Catholics call Tradition. In sum, Scripture presupposes Tradition. Both contain revelation. Matt, how would a Protestant respond to that?
Well said... I wish every disagreement with fellow Christians is as politely put forward as this🙏🙂.
I know Matt could give you a better, perhaps cleaner explanation of the details, and perhaps my explanation can be lacking (from now on I will emphazise certain words in all caps because I don't know how to put them in bold) but as a Protestant I would use the example of King Josiah to explain how I believe we ought to treat the Church's way of arranging and recognizing Scripture. When king Josiah was given the scrolls of the Law, which were given by God and written by man, he RECOGNIZED them as the Word of God that was given to Moses, and he decided to DEVOTE himself and Israel to the Law of God. The Law was the revelation, he just recognized it as such (by God's providence). Now apply that to the Early Church and the New Testament. The Apostles wrote down the Gospels, the Epistles, Luke wrote down Acts, and John wrote Revelation. And during the period of the Early Church they DEVOTED themselves to the Apostles teachings, which reflected what they actually experienced, which was the ministry and power of Christ. The RECOGNIZED the words of the Apostles as the Word of God, just as Josiah RECOGNIZED the words of Moses as the Word of God.
The key here is now their response, they devoted themselves, they surrendered all their authority to these words, they did not make themselves into a new, secondary authority because they recognized what God had said, but became sole subjects of the Word of God. And the Counsils then simply reaffiremed what was already considered authoritative, the didn't CHOOSE, they RECOGNIZED.
One last thing, when Paul gave the famous warning in Galatians about rejecting false Gospels, he included HIMSELF!! that means he was subject of the previous revelation, and if he ever tried to reinterpret it or change it in any way, he asked them to reject HIM. If the Church is wholy subject to the Word, then tradition has no authority, for tradition may, over time, contradict Scripture without meaning to, and if that ever happens, my duty is to REJECT tradition.
This was one of the primary points which led me to the Catholic Church
That assumes that Catholicism is the only tradition. What about Eastern Orthodox? What about the Anglican Church? Each of these can trace a tradition back to the era of Apostles and Christ himself. What about the Messianic Jewish tradition? It can trace back even further. Perhaps it's not in a specific "Church" but in "the church" that the tradition is found.
@@OfficialDiRT
The Anglican church was a splinter from the Roman Catholic church. So the focused should only be on the Orthodox and Catholic church. Prior to the great schism in 1054, they were united as the universal catholic church.
I tend to look at which church (between the two) carried out Christ great commission, that is, spreading the Good news to the world. To me, it was the Roman Catholic church that did that and so, i have landed my faith onto that church.
It took me several years of learning the Gospel before finally this March I had that moment of surrender.
As a Catholic this helps me appreciate my evangelical friends more. And I feel that if they watched your videos, they would appreciate their Catholic friends more too. Thanks for such a balanced approach to looking at a topic people are passionate about!
A pedo Pope who is infallible is ridiculous and heretical. Plus the fact that Rome constantly changes doctrine all the time. Look up how Vatican City became a country. It was gifted by Mussolini for the Pope supporting his Fascist government.
"Baptism is a work" Pastor Jeff. This is most certainly true....a work of God.
My head almost certainly exploded when he said to that
What you both fail to distinguish is that it can be both a work of God and a work of man. ONLY the former gives salvation. Therefore no particular instantiation of baptism as performed by a human is per se representative of salvation unless God blesses the baptism. Therefore, it is not to say that no act of baptism can save, but it's an important distinction to realize that the power ultimately and eternally depends on God's will which we as humans cannot dictate, even in instances where we assume with good reason that we're doing what it is he wants.
@@WalksandSuch seems an odd thing to say when it is a church that has BAPTIS(m)t in its identity. Seems to me that it was a "work" that Christ found worthy as did John the Baptist or they wouldn't have bothered with it.
When Jesus and Paul were talking about baptism though, they were referring to the baptism of the Spirit. A person believes and Holy Ghost baptized him to the body of Christ. It is the work of the Spirit. Not the water. Water has nothing to do with Christianity , it is old testament tradition slipped to New testament because of the traditionalist like Apostle Peter. Apostle Paul didn't emphasize on water baptism ,so didn't our Lord Jesus.
@@samt7785 Means is what God has chosen to use to work His Grace. He used dirt mixed with spit to wipe on the Blind Man's Eyes to Heal him. He used the Pole with the Serpent for the Israelites to look upon for healing. He used the Donkey to bring Christ into Jerusalem. He uses us to accomplish his purposes. He chose Water Baptism to communicate His Grace. He chooses Bread and Wine to communicate His Forgiveness and Grace to us. It's clear in Scripture. Don't let the fear of being "too Catholic" distract you from the clear Word of God.
“The Catholic Church is the only thing which saves a man from the degrading slavery of being a child of his age”
― G.K. Chesterton, The Catholic Church And Conversion
Jesus saves, not the Catholic church. We are Justified and forgiven of our sins when we put our faith in Jesus Christ and Him alone. Read Galatians 2 or the whole book of Galatians for that matter.
@@BryanOS As a Catholic, we believe what you just said.
I think semantics comes into play when La Fe de la Iglesia used that quote. However, you need to understand that Jesus indeed established the Church, and thus the Church came form Him. Hence, when it says that the Church is what saves the man, it does ultimately mean that Jesus, who created the Church, is what saves the man. Just to clarify things :) God bless.
BMan wrong. Outside the Church there is no salvation. As the Ark saved Noah and his family through water, the Church saves it’s members through Jesus Christ.
James Powell No, sir. The ark of Noah is a representation of Christ Jesus. Everyone who is in Him will not perish, but will be saved. Jesus said that He's the way, the truth, & the life. Paul states in Galatians 2 that the works od the Law cannot make one righteous and justified before God. Our faith in Jesus Christ is what truly justifies us. John 3:16 states that whosoever BELIEVES in the SON will not PERISH, but have eternal life. Ask yourself, what made Abraham righteous before God? Was it the fact that he was circumcised? Was it his good works? No. He was made righteous because of His faith in God (Romans 4, Galatians 3). My friend, the Church cannot save. Those that have truly been forgiven and justified by placing their faith in Jesus Christ are the Church. The Church are the believers in Christ. The Church is not a building, traditions, systems, etc... The Church are the believers in Jesus Christ. My friend, I challenge you to give some thought to what I said. God bless.
James Powell There are plenty of people that go to church that are not saved. There are also plenty of saved people that don’t go to church for a number of reasons. Salvation comes from our acceptance of christ’s sacrifice for us. Not from attending a service or mass.
Finally a nondenominational pastor who admits their baptist roots, it was a breath of fresh air.
Exactly... I jus had a guy on a different video from TMBH .. that got annoyed because I called the "Free church" Baptist... smh
Wittenberg Project i mean in Europe the free churches identify themselves as Baptist’s. Idk why here they are so adamantly against their proper theological label. If your church teaches baptist theology it is baptist it doesn’t matter what strange name it calls itself
Anabapstist, I'd add
Athanasius Greene The non-denominational churches in my town are identical to the Baptists.
Francisco Bórquez K. Anabaptists are the mennonites , Amish, Hutterites,etc. Not the Baptist’s who split from the English separatist movement which split from Anglicanism.
Yes, Baptism is a work, but not our work. It is God's work. He baptizes us into the death and resurrection of our Lord Jesus and thereby forgives us our sins and gives us a new life.
Jakob 2:14
Nathan Ramsay No, it’s worse than that. We are baptized while dead in our sins.
@@Hello-ro8fq You might be if you are an infant!
M J - "Baptism is a work, but not our work. It is God's work."
That is what we call a 'sacrament'.
Very misunderstood by the Protestant Church, which wrongly accuses us of a host of egregious practices.
It is the work of Jesus (death & resurrection) which figures our sins & our faith given to us via the Holy Spirit which empowers us to new life & not the symbol of baptism.
Thanks for this video. I come from the Jehovahs witnesses community. I have been out for almost three years and do not want to join any church but I have started going to different churches just to see how they do things and it has been very enlightening. I really like the way you talk to people of different faiths and celebrate things they have in common and any differences. You have an amazing ability to interact with all kinds of people. Thanks for all you do
I know Im 3 years late to the party, but man I just gotta say it, what you're doing is awesome, your desire for honest exchange of ideas and new knowledge is admirable and the fact that you are documenting this process for us to see and learn along with you is something Im very thankfull for. God bless you and may the Holy Spirit guide you to The Truth
Another way to look at the Last Supper, the Communion is it is a Marriage contract. I know you are really big into history and research and maybe you have heard of this but one thing that gets left out of Easter service teachings is this. In Israel, the father and the groom to be would come to the family of the future bride. A contract would be offered, also known as the betrothal, at which point the young lady could refuse it. If she accepted it then the groom would break bread and share with her, and then they would share a cup of wine. The bread was to signify his providing for her and when they shared the wine, he would promise not to share wine again with any other until they were united in marriage. The father and groom then left and returned home at which point he would prepare a room for his wedding, a wedding chamber. While he did so, the father would gather food and drink in preparation for the wedding feast.....you see where this is going? There have been numerous studies done on this. At the last supper, Jesus, speaking to fellow Jews put it in terms that made sense to them. Hope this helps and provides a way of looking at events unfolding around them in a different and ultimately glorious way.
Wow
Can I please have references and links to this? This looks awesome and makes so much more sense when it comes to communion. I want to do more research.
I hadn’t heard this before but it makes sense. Christ gave His life for His bride, the Church. At every Mass, He gives Himself literally to the Church, and the faithful literally receive Him under the guise of bread and wine.
Read Dr. Brant Pitre's books and that of Scott Hahn's! you sound like them :)
Wow, that's an awesome revelation. I've never seen it from that perspective before (mostly because I didn't know much about Jewish marriage rituals), but it makes perfect sense with what Jesus did and said. For the first time I understand why He said:
Mat 26:29 NKJV "But I say to you, I will not drink of this fruit of the vine from now on until that day when I drink it new with you in My Father's kingdom."
Thanks for that. If you have a resource or source that we can study this from in more detail that would be appreciated.
In John 6, the disciples left Jesus because they couldn't handle what Jesus was saying about the Eucharist, they couldn't believe he was saying eat his flesh...but Jesus didn't stop them from leaving by saying "oh wait, it was just a metaphor or symbol". The eucharist is real.
Major Weakness
Agreed
But John 6 does note confirm the fact that what the Lord said was physical in essence. There are ardent and ample room in the chapter to say that Jesus was speaking in spiritual terms. He said to those who were put down by his words ' The words I have spoken to you are spirit and they are life' so it has ample room to have a spiritual take on it .
@@2610paul but then Paul says you must discern the body and blood of the lord and ate not to take it unworthy. Doesn't sound like it is just a spiritual meaning. I appreciate your comment though
@@MajorWeakness I didn't read anything about people attempting to bite chunks of the Lord off like ravening dogs either. If they took it literally they probably would have. In any case I realize that was moderately sarcastic but the truth is Jesus is referred to as The Word many times in the Bible and when we hear his words we are in essence eating his body because his words were life. We eat the words with our minds, even "chew" them as we think about them and eventually incorporate the Lord (his character) into our bodies. The blood is also allegory to the Holy Spirit that was poured out on the day of Pentecost.
@@a-aron6724 the first Christian's would disagree with your interpretation
It takes great courage to step outside the comfort zone as well as stepping into something you thought would be comfortable, but with a different perspective. Your reverence for all the faith traditions has been so welcoming and dispels many of the misconceptions that we have painfully heard from those with closed minds and hearts, thinking theirs is the only way to Heaven. You have opened up an Ecumenical Door so few would have the courage to cross the threshold. As a Catholic, I consider you a brother in Christ. That is the bottom line.
All I can say is amen and I'm a protestant lol
Jeff has a lot of wisdom. The guy has God’s hand on his life. Praise Jesus for this brother.
Hi Matt! A non-catholic here possibly wanting to convert. I loved your spill at the end where you talked about how you could see how catholics feel so strongly about the eucharist by taking John 6 literally and then touched on how others read it as a metaphor. What is compelling me to see the "real presence" point of view is when it finally clicked for me that we are reading and interpreting the bible from a 16th century and beyond view point BUT that is not the way it is meant to be read. It is meant to be read through the eyes of a first century Jew because that was the audience Jesus was speaking to. And if you read it like that you realize that the last supper was a passover meal that jews did every year in "remembrance" of God saving his people in Exodus with the sacrifice of the lamb. The sacrifice was not complete by only killing the lamb and using the blood to mark the door but by EATING the lamb. At the last supper Jesus has taken his place as the new passover lamb whose blood is shed by the cross and whose flesh is to be eaten by his followers!! This was such a powerful point when I researched it; it blew me away. There is so much other language in the gospels that all foreshadow this. He calls himself "the bread of life", the mana that came down from heaven like in exodus. When he was born he was lain in a feeding trough.. It is just such a powerful theology to explore. Brant Pitre's book Jesus and the Jewish Roots of the Eucharist is a phenomenal read!
But Jews didn't drink the lamb's blood at Passover so your analogy doesn't work there. Please, before you go deep end into Catholicism, know the other things they believe first. Mary, the Saints, Papal infallibility, church tradition over the Bible--a man (pope's) word over God's word.
I feel you in that we evangelicals have thrown off all ritual and liturgy to our detriments. Ritual and liturgy done well give us some anchor points to draw closer to one another as one body of brothers and sisters in Christ and understand/feel in a deeper way God's holiness and our own inadequacy.
I grew up Eve Free. At some point, I became Reformed. Then Lutheran for 10+ years. Due to life circumstances, I am back in an Eve Free style church. (Although, theologically, I’m still very Lutheran.) it’s very interesting to watch all these interviews. Also, I’ve attended Four different Lutheran churches, and none were as fancy as the one you toured with Will Weedon. One of them is Trinity Lutheran in Denver, if you’re ever in the area. An excellent confessional Lutheran church. Keep doing these videos. It’s so good to have all these Christians talking to one another and learning about each other.
I love these video's!! I hope you understand how important and needed your UA-cam Ministry is, to both believer's and seekers. :)
Can you do a video of your testimony or your story of faith (whatever you'd prefer to call it?) herring you briefing talk about your journey after seminary definitely peeked my interest. (if you've already done one please direct me 😊)
You should check out the podcast Matt co-hosts with Destin from SmarterEveryDay. He's delved into that a bit in some of the episodes and it comes up from time to time You kind of get a behind-the-scenes look at who Matt really is. If you decide to give it a listen, I would suggest starting from the beginning. It's called "No Dumb Questions".
@@mb3581 Yeah, you can see bits and pieces here and there in the podcast but I would quite like a video solely dedicated to his testimony also.
I was raised in a Hispanic evangelical Pentecostal church, And am currently not affiliated with any tradition but still in love with Christ and the Bible , Your video on the Eastern Orthodox Church has been very fascinating to me , have watched it countless times , very in awe of the beauty of that tradition and interested in continuing to learn about it although most of my doctrinal beliefs are leaning towards evangelical perspective
Javier Luyanda I’ve been in a similar position before becoming Catholic. My biggest pieces of advice would be
1) Read the Bible every day
2) Pray for Truth and Love every day
3) Visit other churches. Go to an Orthodox Church and a Catholic Church and ask the pastor some questions
4) Don’t ever stop looking for Truth and Love, no matter what.
God will guide you
That video was helpful for me, a black former Pentecostal, in being interested in learning about Orthodoxy. I've been visiting an Orthodox church for the past month or so and I'm seriously considering joing the Orthodoxy. May the Lord guide you on your journey!
That’s great , I believe that there are true saved followers of Christ in nearly every denomination and sect however some are closer to the complete truth and original church Christ established then others ! I am definitely drawn to this branch of Orthodoxy however as a formal Protestant and Pentecostal have you come to terms with praying/venerating icons of saints ? And if so how? that’s my greatest barrier at the moment
Former**
@@javierluyanda2845 I have come to terms with those things. Here's the thing:
As for prayer to saints, I keep in mind that the word "pray" does not inherently mean something that you do to a deity. Historically and etymologically, it has meant "to ask", hence, archaic terms like "pray tell" or "I pray thee". When Orthodox Christians and Catholics "pray to saints", they are not treating them as gods; they ask them to pray to God on their behalf, same way one would ask someone on earth to pray for them. I've come to conclude that it doesn't make sense to act like a person stops being part of the Church once they pass away - they go into the presence of God, and continue to pray to Him on behalf of His people.
As for veneration, I notice that it gets conflated with "worship" a lot. Orthodox Christians affirm that there is only one worthy of worship: One God in Trinity, Trinity in Unity.
When you worship something, you devote yourself entirely to your object of worship - Orthodox Christians give themself over to be united with God.
To venerate is to treat something or someone deep respect, love, and honor, showing delight for what God has done. We give both worship and veneration to God, but we can venerate (not worship) things other than God.
The Orthodox venerate saints because they are part of God's family, they are our older brothers and sisters in Christ and models of faith. To venerate a saint for example is to show happiness for what God has done through them.
They kiss icons of saints because the icon serves as a reminder of our departed brothers and sisters in Christ, and to show respect for their image is to show respect for who the image depicts (they don't honor wood or paint or stone). It's like when a person salutes their nation's flag - they're not showing respect for a piece of fabric, but what the flag represents. It's something similar with icons.
I feel it should also be noted that kissing and bowing are both forms of greeting and respect in many Eastern countries.
Edit: I apologize for the block of text
This is my favorite "series" on youtube. I will watch every one you make. These discussions are so important to understanding other perspectives. To not being separate tribes but reaching across the aisle and saying, "Why do you believe that?" instead of, "This is what you should believe." Can't wait for more and I tell people to check these out all the time. Thanks!
James said "Faith without works is dead." My works is the evidence of my relationship with Jesus. Communion, baptism, giving to the poor, loving my brother as myself etc. It's the outward fruit of my faith. I do my works in thanksgiving to God.
Ephesians 2:8-9 KJV
8 For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God.
9 Not of works, lest any man should boast.
And Paul says "by grace you are saved through faith, not by works, so no man can boast". The question is what do we do with two seemingly contradictory verses?
As a Lutheran, it was amazing to hear someone explain their faith in a way that sounded so similar to Lutheranism. At the same time, Pastor Foote has a very different perspective on the ministry, what the Church is, and especially on worship. In my mind, it all sounds like the differences come from our different views on the sacraments. It was really interesting to see how those different views can cause such big differences in how we do church. Thanks so much for the video Matt!
Pretty sure he's wrong about them originally being Baptist and that the EFCA was actually formed out of a split from a Lutheran denomination, so it makes sense there would be some similarities. I believe the Lutheran roots are part of why they still accept infant baptism, for example.
Appreciate how you honor your own beliefs, and those you differ with. Need more of that in this world.
Always interesting, you managed to have that open-minded "newcomer way" of asking questions even within your own tradition. Very beneficial for us the viewers.
Thank you, and thanks also for understanding what I'm trying to accomplish there.
Listening to the pastor, I finally realized Evangelicals use the Salvation by Grace through Faith formula, but Faith means belief for them, but Faith in the other traditions is a fidelity planted in the person by the Holy Spirit.
As a former evangelical who converted to the Lutheran church, I found this episode difficult to watch. I understand and know the language and theology presented because I was steeped in it from infancy. But this traditional almost made me walk away from Christ. I was lost and felt no assurance, when asking complex questions I was given very surface answers. How could I know I was saved if the fruit of my works was the only way to tell? Did that mean that if I did no good works than I must not be saved? These and other questions haunted me, I felt alone and adrift. Then in my brokenness I walked into a Lutheran church. I didn't even know what that meant at the time. It was there that I was taught that questioning traditions and beliefs was the cornerstone of the Christian faith. I was also given amazingly detailed answers to my questions and was encouraged to read more about where those answers came from. Volumes of books were given to me, along with thoughtful instruction. The implication that those that follow Church tradition don't question those traditions, or that those traditions don't stand up to questioning, absolutely boggles my mind.
I really love this video. It’s clear to me that you’ve been thinking about the Catholic/Orthodox Perspective on the role of the sacraments in comparison to this pastor’s perspective. Your questions were on point!
I'm very interested to learn more about churches which serve predominately black congregations.
But there are so many! Some are part of regular denominations and some are in the black communities mainly. Modes of worship are so different.
Well, that's what I'm trying to understand better; the "venn diagram"
Can whites have white churches?
I see what you did there.
@@davidmyers5224 can my people(europeans) have our own church too?
Antiochian Orthodox here, thank you for your discussions and god bless!
I really enjoy Antiochian liturgies. The music is beautiful.
T R yeah im a recent concert and I agree. Instruments are cool in church but restricting it to singing really makes the singing amazing I think
Interview Scott Hahn! The greatest theologians living today! You’ll have 500,000+ views
I second this. I hope it happens.
That would be incredible!
yes please!!
Yes! Please!
Steve Ray and Peter Kreft would be other good ones coming from a Protestant background
I’m new to your channel, but I have thoroughly enjoyed this series of videos you’ve done. Thank you for the time you put into this.
I would say a Presbyterian (OPC, RPCNA specifically) episode would be appropriate. You've gone High church and Low church. Time for some middle ground. Check into Tyler Presbyterian Church, , a Beautiful church, in Tyler Tx if you are ever interested.
Dear Matt
you're doing God's work. God bless you!
“The Church is an invention of Jesus.” Amen! Matthew 16. God bless you both!
The Church is more than an invention. The Church is His Bride - part of Himself.
I love your questions to the pastor and I commend your open-mindedness.
i'm so happy that i stumbled across this channel the other day! i'm fascinated by christianity and its culture, i've been devouring these videos -- so excited for more!
Thanks Maya! I've got more like this right around the corner!
Interested in Christian culture? You won't find anything as rich and ancient as the Catholic Church. Our celebrations and forms of worship actually pre-date Jesus Christ in some cases!!
jimmyintheswamp i would disagree, if you go back in history you won’t find the Modern Roman Catholic Church, you would find the Orthodox Church, Roman Catholicism separated front the true church in 1054. In the first century the theology looks more Protestant in some aspects too. Read the church fathers
@@Solideogloria00 I'm steeped in the Church Fathers. Justin Martyr (can 150) is the earliest non-scriptural source related to the celebration of the Mass. Have you ever attended a traditional Latin Mass? Nothing about it is Protestant. As far as history is concerned, why do so many of the Fathers take Roman primacy as a given? And why was Constantinople dubbed "the new Rome"? There is too much to cover here. Just know that I continue to pray for Christian unity as is the command of our Lord Jesus Christ 🙏
I'm non-religious but I like this guy's style. I hope you do more of these videos in the future.
You may think you are not religious because you have not accepted Jesus Christ as your Lord and Savior, BUT you do worship something. What is that thing? Money? Prestige? The Internet?
Not passing Judgement, but this is something you should ask yourself. Even if you feel like you are not "worshiping" that "thing," what is your time and adoration put to?
God Bless you and your family!
The "freedom" we have in Christ seems to be much scarier to people than any "command" we could ever be given
Love these videos AND reading the comments. You do such a good job of encouraging, mostly, friendly debate. There are a few outliers, but overall people are doing a good job of talking through what they believe.
Oh wait, maybe I should type it like this because it is more important:
LOVE THESE VIDEOS AND READING THE COMMENTS!
I mean that should mean I'm automatically right, it's in all caps.
Thanks for the effort into these videos!! Thanks to those willing to have deep conversations in a loving manner. Yay for CO & WY🤓
Great video Matt. --> One quick observation: Protestants Pastors often say: I think, I believe, or I feel. Where as the Orthodox or Catholic Priests will say: We think, We believe, We feel.
Good observation ;)
I think that has to do with how they view their authority, a protestant pastor says I think because that's the conclusion he/she came to and they can show you how they got there but ultimately is up to you to decide if you agree with them. Where as with a Catholic or Orthodox church understanding it's we because the church is the authority and if you don't agree then you're wrong.
That is because the Roman CHURCH HAS TO FOLLOW THE LEADERSHIP OR THEY CAN BE ASKED TO LEAVE. TO THE R.C.s that means they are not regarded as believers then , as they are converted to their denomination .Much the same as a cult that say we are right and all others wrong.
True but you will also find lots of protestant pastors saying "I think" the same things. For example Presbyterians hold fast to the Westminister Confession of Faith (I could be wrong but I'm pretty sure), and many other Protestants hold many of the same values.
@@wendymitchell8245 Not trying to argue as that is not my purpose, but I did just want to point out that Jesus, Paul and the other apostles did point out if there is some differences involve, you ultimately talk/discuss about it to the church. Jesus said if a brother sins against you, you tell him his fault. If that doesn't work, bring one or two with you. Then if he yet refuses, you tell it to the Church. We believe as Christians that it's not just I, but it's a relationship between God and I, and with that in mind, loving your neighbor comes into play, as we can also see God in other people. Hence, it's not I, but _we_ as the Church. Matthew 18:15-20
The Catholic Church indeed follows a leadership, but not the leadership of what you think, which is a misconception. We indeed follow Jesus, as He is the head and we are the body. The head and the body are connected, therefore it's a relationship, and a relationship isn't "me, myself, and I", but rather it's _we_ together. 1 Colossians.
May God Bless you sister!
It's interesting to note that the pastors' upbringing is the pastors' 'tradition', which gives him his understanding of the Bible. And that is true of all denominations - there is a 'tradition' which surrounds their interpretation of Scripture.
The great difference is that the Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox Church both share the same 'tradition'. And that tradition was the only one that came together and through the Holy Spirit defined what would and would not be called the Bible.
It is the writings the Apostolic and Early Church Fathers left behind and have survived that guides our understanding of the Bible and what the Early Church was like.
Some great reformists even attempted to have certain writings removed from what we know today as being the Word of God because they failed to fall in line with the new doctrines they were promoting.
This, with all due respect, is the problem I have with Protestantism.
Do you have any references for protestants wanting to remove books from their canon? I'm genuinely curious to read about that if you do?
You should watch his video on how we got the Bible. It's great!
TheReWilliamWhite - Martin Luther wanted to remove James, Jude, Hebrews and Revelations. The reformers chose to remove the Deuterocanonical books which include 7 Old Testament books along with portions of Esther and Daniel. These seven books include many of the clearest prophecies of Jesus’ birth, death and resurrection. Interesting fact: they also describe Hanukkah.
@@amandah8178 - you're exactly right. The reformers wanted anything that didn't sit well with their theology to be removed, and as you pointed out, they were successful in doing so to a great degree.
Modern day Protestants don't look at this fact to see how manipulative the Protestant side of the Church was and is. They point the finger at Catholicism (Roman and Eastern Orthodox) and claim they have EXTRA books. It's not that we have extra books, it's that we still have the original books of the Bible as compiled by those that were guided by the Holy Spirit.
leavesnpetals Which is something I never knew until I started researching the early church! I spoke with a Protestant pastor who was taught in seminary that there were two Bibles, a Catholic and a Protestant one since the time of Christ. 🧐 I definitely thought that Catholics had ‘extra’ books until I learned the truth.
Thank you for talking about evangelicals , it has been taken to mean extreme points of view and Jeff had a brilliant take on it .
Keep up the fantastic work!
Matt, you're the man! There's too much radical stuff on the Internet.
Hey! I really love this series because as a busy Catholic, I don’t get much time to learn about other faiths. There is one big point I would encourage you to delve further with. This pastor insists that to be initiated in the Church, you just have to accept Christ and Baptism doesn’t really matter beyond being a nice ceremony. Where is this in the Bible? Jesus insists that we must be reborn by water and spirit. Water and spirit. Paul and Peter both insist this, so why did the Evangelical tradition abandon that over 1500 years later? God doesn’t change. Throughout the Bible, he begins new things with Spirit and water. Genesis, the Spirit hovers over the water. The dove, representing the Spirit hovered over the water before the ark. There are several more examples of this! Christ Himself didn’t need to be Baptized, but he did it as a model for us. He is Baptized, and the Spirit comes down above him as the dove. Christ insists that to be saved we must be Baptized!
In the Catholic tradition, Baptism is a rebirth of spirit by the water. God know what works best, so he’s going to do it the same every time. Accepting Christ as your personal Savior is a Baptist tradition, yet they reject tradition and believe in Sola Scriptura. Keep up the good work! I can see the gears turning in your head as you learn about these different faiths. I’ll be praying for you!
I would point to Abraham being justified by faith, or the beggar on the cross who didn't do all these things and he was still saved (according to Jesus).
I know, especially for the beggar you would say he didn't have the chance to do it and therefore it didn't matter, however that is an argument from silence that I don't think has enough wight for me personally.
Matt your videos are awesome.Such a great tool for people who have very little idea what various Christian denominations believe.As a Catholic I find these videos so interesting.
Hi, Matt! I think your videos about different forms of Christianity are amazing! I'm from Slovenia, a predominantly Catholic country, where we never learnt about other forms of Christianity, but since I always wanted to learn more about them, I'm really glad that I found your videos. I'm learning a lot from them :)
Will you also present Lutherans, please?
You're such a fantastic conversationalist.
I really appreciate you saying that!
"Those don't tend to be all that fruitful-even when you use all caps." Wow. I almost died laughing. That was good!
Thanks for the video, Matt. I'm praying for you and your journey. May we all be united as one body.
you should make a playlist of these visiting other churches
Your channel is one of my favorite Internet discoveries ever! I’m so grateful for the analysis and history you present, and I especially love this series. I’ve really enjoyed learning about these different denominations with you. As the series continues, maybe you could continue branching out into religions that aren’t Christianity. Historically, there’s been a lot of hurt and misunderstanding between us and people who come from other belief systems. It would be so refreshing and healing to see you engage in the open listening and discussion you do on this channel with people of other faiths.
Thank you Aaron! I absolutely intend to do exactly what you're suggesting, and I appreciate your patience with me in advance as I bumble through asking questions of people I know even less about. Hopefully it will be received with the grace with which it is intended.
"The minute you make it a formula you rob it of it's power." "We're not saved by good works but for good works." Profound. 🤔
Great discussion, Matt. I'm really learning a lot from these conversations. Thank you!
25:10 "Well I like how you said nail it down..."
Me: thinks an awkward metaphor about Jesus being nailed to the cross is incoming.
"Because it all goes back to Luther, you know? With the theses..."
Me: Oh thank goodness.
Thank you for your channel you have been teaching me a great deal.
As a 67 year-old Catholic, I have come to the view that the Catholic church elevates the Eucharist at the expense of the Gospel. If I try speak to other Catholics about this, they get very defensive. I have even been told by our choir director that the Eucharist is the center of our faith. I am sorry, but I cannot agree with that. I look at St. Paul and as far as I can tell approximately 98% of Paul's letters revolve around faith in Christ's atonement ("but we preach Christ crucified") and what that means in our lives; less than 1% refers to the Eucharist. This can't be an accident. The Eucharist is incredibly important especially when it points to Christ's sacrifice, but the Eucharistic celebration has, IMO, supplanted the proclamation of the Gospel. Thanks for this video. It is very refreshing to hear other Christian views.
Brother, they're equally important. The mass is divided in two: the liturgy of the word and liturgy of the Eucharist. Both are Christ. As the word is Christ and so is the Eucharist. I'm sorry that you feel that way, but even the structure of the mass indicates they're equal as they're both Christ and inseparable from who he is. Blessings to you!!!
@@learningtogrow3535 I do not think there is a point of debating this issue with you. I was trying to point out that the preaching of the Gospel has suffered at the hands of believers who think the Eucharist is the end-all. Look at it this way: Why isn't the Catholic church - my Church - overflowing with Grace and holy people? After all, it is the one Church (Orthodox excepted) that champions Holy Communion more that any other. The answer, IMO: Because you have to believe in the Gospel first. Your argument is theoretical, but it is not based on reality. I see a Church that is suffering from a certain deficiency, and you are trying to tell me that it is alright.
I can see where you are coming from. Sometimes in the richness and beautiful of the faith, people forget what is really important. It's not the doctrine on the Eucharist or how it is celebrated that is the centre of our faith- it's the Eucharist itself-- Jesus.
The Eucharist is the centre of our faith, because the Eucharist is Jesus, and Jesus is the centre. It's not your choir director's opinion; this is the teaching of the Church. The Mass is a re-presentation of Jesus' sacrifice--- that *is* the Gospel, is it not? That God created us for a relationship with Him, the relationship was broken by sin, and through Jesus, restored again through His sacrifice?
The Eucharist being elevated at the expense of the Gospel is not the problem. The problem is that people go to church and go through the motions without understanding the faith, or believing. They aren't catechized, or they are catechized but not evangelized. Why isn't the Church overflowing with grace and holy people? It is. However, we need to respond to God's grace. And as the Bible warns us, it is possible to receive communion without discerning the body of Christ.
God works in wonderous ways. The Eucharist, as others have mentioned, is God's work. I rarely went to church as a child. At the first Mass I remember attending, perhaps at 10 years old, I didn't understand what was going on. But during the liturgy of the Eucharist, I felt such a strong sense of God's presence that I would call it my first "conversion". After that, I was compelled to learn more about the faith & Jesus.
I was born into a Catholic family by devout parents and grandparents. Like yourself, I have my moments of criss in my faith journey with Jesus. But Jesus keeps finding a way to call me, and more deeply each time. Now I am experiencing a crisis of where to worship to deepen my journey within a community of believers who are all about love, relationship, and faith. Thank you so much for your series. It's really me in discerning where God wants me to be. It is beautiful that despite all of the doctrinal issues, we we seem to all have Jesus' love for us as the heart. Again, thanks. Still searching, "still haven't found what I am looking for." Praying day and night for God's gentle, guiding voice, and His silence.
I loved how you mentioned at the end how this discussion landed on Catholic or Orthodox ears. It feels like this is one of only a handful of channels that acknowledges that Catholicism is a sect of Christianity, and I appreciate how I can learn about other sects in such a friendly environment. God bless you Matt!
The important point is, what is the gospel ,how do you become a Christian ,as the church is only a group of Christians. PETER PREACHED BELIEVE ,REPENT AND BE BAPTISED,and CONTINUE IN THE APOSTLES DOCTRINE. THE ROMAN church teaches you are made a Christian by a priest putting water on a babies head . In other words it is a ritual someone is put through without their knowledge .Most of these people do not grow up to become true believers.
Wendy Mitchell In the covenant with Israel, circumcision was required for salvation. It was done by the parents to start the child’s life on the right track. It’s mentioned multiple times in scripture that Baptism is the new circumcision. Same principles apply. Also, Our blessed Lord tells Nicodemus in St. John’s gospel that unless you are born again of water and spirit you cannot enter the kingdom of God. That’s just a small taste of a defense of the older view of baptism.
@@johnmarquardt1991 It would be really helpful if you could give a Bible reference, or two, to support what you're saying. 😊👍🏻
@@thepunkrockchristian It would be really helpful if you could give a Bible reference, or two, about circumcision being required for salvation. 😊👍🏻
@Payshie H you mean like John 3:5?
Keep up the great work! As an Indy Baptist I have thoroughly enjoyed all your visits and discussions.
Absolutely fantastic educational videos. I’d love to pick your brain some time. Keep up the great work!
I love your real open discussions, as you said, looking at our faith from different perspectives with respect and love is beautiful.
Matt, thank you for taking the time to make these incredible and informative videos. As a once card carrying Calvary Chapel member now become a Catholic, I completely understand the language your guest is speaking.
Before I became a Catholic I took my faith for granted in the sense that I didn't question the Bible or God's ministers.
Your guest brought up many familiar aspects of my days in the Evangelical Protestant church; the Bible being our sole authority in matters of faith, beliefs, and morals. Another aspect being the priesthood of all believers and the person's individual assent to belief in Christ.
If the Bible is the supreme authority (to Protestants) and Saint Paul when he is referencing the Scriptures in his Epistles he's talking about the Old Testament, how then do Protestants include the New Testament books as Scripture while denying the Church its rightful place in determining thru the Holy Spirit which books are to be canon?
Matt, you mentioned that some people are attracted to pre-1500s thought while others are attracted to post 1500s thought and that'll determine where they may end up within the greater Christian spectrum; altho that may hold some truth, I think it's painting with a very broad brush. I mean, within the first few centuries of Christianity, what did the Christians have as options for their individual tastes? Or what options of thought did they have to choose from?
If someone went too far with a particular belief, who's to say that was going too far?
Did the Church operate only as individual communities tied together by a common belief or did the Church also operate as a living organism sharing with one another a core belief and when the Church got together to settle a dispute over some beliefs or practices did She not settle it with a Council? Has this not been the Church's practice in settling things once and for all? What Church today do we see that continues to hold councils that are binding upon its members and shapes the course of the Church?
The guest states that if the Eucharist and Baptism conferred any grace then he'd have those two ordinances everytime at church services but said that he doesn't believe it to be so therefore he doesn't have them done everytime yet holds them to be very important. It's very much this type of thinking that is a Hallmark of Protestantism, i.e. the elevated opinion of the individual to interpret Scripture of their own liking.
If Scripture is so plain to understand then why did Martin Luther find opposition from his other Protestant Reformation comrades and ultimately splinter into many various branches?
Matt, Lutheranism holds to Baptismal Regeneration but I'm certain that your guest would not. Where does the list of majors and minors go and how far? Who's to say what are the majors and minors? I'm certain that a Catholic and Orthodox Christians would have many similarities but so too many differences that they'd consider to be of utmost importance which would be the same amongst Protestant Christians. So who's to say?
I apologize for rambling on!
I'm not trying to get into a theological debate because honestly I'm not one to do well in such circumstances and God hadn't given me a mind of a theologian. 🤙😊
Pax Christi.
I love the Autumn Colors ...all good points Autumn, unfortunately the nature of a “free”church is that it can splinter into thousands of interpretations, based on individual interpretation and opinion. That is the beauty of higher churches, that interpretation is done by the collective ensuring that it is well reasoned and researched.
Such a great conversation! Matt, you ask great questions and really get to the heart of what matters. Good stuff!
To your summary at the end of the video as a Roman Catholic I say Amen.
Thank you for another good conversation. I am deeply appreciative of how respectful you are of other religious traditions. I love how you encourage your guests to describe their doctrines on their own merits, and not how they stand in opposition to other traditions. Wonderful ecumenical offerings. Thanks!!
I relate to that experience, the whole "listening to one's own views through the ears of someone who disagrees"
I really appreciate the last few minutes of this video. You are doing God's work! God bless you and your ministry.
Thank you for doing this series. One follow-up question: if, as a Protestant, you believe the Reformation was an effort to get back to the roots of the Church before us Catholics messed everything up, how do you view issues where the clear consensus in the writings of the early Church fathers favors the Catholic/Orthodox position?
For example, the Eucharist is frequently described as the actual body and blood of Christ in these writings. Examples:
"I have no taste for corruptible food nor for the pleasures of this life. I desire the Bread of God, which is the flesh of Jesus Christ, who was of the seed of David; and for drink I desire his blood, which is love incorruptible." - Ignatius of Antioch, Letter to the Romans 7:3, early second century
"[T]he food which has been made into the Eucharist by the Eucharistic prayer set down by Him, and by the change of which our blood and flesh is nourished, is both the flesh and the blood of that incarnated Jesus." - Justin Martyr, First Apology 66, mid second century
"When, therefore, the mixed cup and the baked bread receives the Word of God and becomes the Eucharist, the body of Christ, and from these the substance of our flesh is increased and supported, how can they say that the flesh is not capable of receiving the gift of God, which is eternal life -- flesh which is nourished by the body and blood of the lord." - Irenaus of Lyons, Against Heresies 5:2:2-3, late second century
As a protestant, I actually do believe in the presence of Christ in the Lord's Supper and think it should be celebrated more often. But I do think I am a rarity, especially being a Charismatic non-denominational Christian.
Thank you! I really appreciate all of your videos encouraging this thinking through Christianity and growing.
Just a thought on John 6, yeah, Jesus might be talking about Him being the bread of life as a metaphor. But as compared to his other statements "I am the way..." "I am the gate.." this particular statement seemed to bother a lot of his followers in fact, some of them said that it's a hard teaching. And a few verses later, some actually stopped following him. I mean, if it was just a simple metaphor and all, why would they react like that?
Also to be noted that he keeps reiterating the "eating" part in John 6... One can never say "truly... truly..." and follow it with a metaphor.
@@michaelratnam1983 Good point. I was raised Protestant but am currently in the process of converting to Catholoicism. Another thing that struck me when researching this was the specific language used. The greek word used for "eat" is more accurately translated as "chew" or "gnaw" and I find it interesting that Jesus was so specific in using that word.
This is what led me home to the Catholic Church. My Protestant pastor was quoting John 6 during communion one Sunday and it hit me that either Jesus was lying or I was wrong about communion merely being a symbol. A couple months later the Holy Spirit was introducing me to the Catholic Church and two years after that I received the Eucharist for the first time!
Stephen Unato good way of stating the question, it’s what’s in those few verses that mattered so greatly the the Jewish audience. It was the phrase “came down from Heaven” which first invited grumbling (see v. 41), and Jesus expressly used the phrase again in v. 58 to press the issue. Keep in mind that He was trying not to maintain a subscriber base, but to weed out those who would not follow Him for who He was. The turning away near the end of the passage is in direct response to “no one can come to me unless it has been granted him from the Father” in v. 65. As in every other gospel passage showing friction with the establishment tradition, Jesus’ claim of divinity and endorsement by the Father are the stumbling block that Israel could not accept. In any case this was pretty early in Jesus’ ministry and the communion would not be administered for a long while yet, don’t really see how it could be made a dealbreaker issue so prematurely and divorced from the context of His teachings at that point in the game, seems that the bread imagery was a theme which served to underscore the main point here and again later on.
New Darganism - this leads to the real question in all of this, which is the question of authority. The Church, established by Jesus and protected by the Holy Spirit, has stated for 2000 years that the Eucharist is the Body and Blood of Jesus, that John 6 is literal. However, you disagree. I don’t mean this flippantly or disrespectfully, but what authority do you have to say that the Church has been in error for the last 2000 years? Catholics are criticized for following Tradition, the Magisterium and Scripture, which were established by Jesus when He established His Church. However, you say that we should follow your interpretation and disregard 2000 years of consistent belief over communion. Why do you hold more authority? Again, I ask this with all sincerity.
Something else to examine is the way that Jesus is setting the scene to establish the Real Presence Of Himself in the Eucharist. Right before this dialogue, He multiplies the bread and flesh of the fish in order to feed the people. He reminds them of the manna that God sent down from heaven, that would sustain them. It’s at THIS point that He says, “Unless you eat My flesh and drink My blood, you have no life within you... I am the manna sent down from heaven.” The feeding of the 5000 is not just an isolated miracle but an intentional act of Christ to lead us to understanding the Eucharist because He divides Himself to feed and sustain everyone who partakes of Him.
Thx again. Despite my strong disagreements, I enjoyed the video for the things we do hold in common and for the humility on your part. God bless.
I’m glad he didn’t tell him to say the Sinners Prayer to become a Christian.
Even Billy Graham never taught that.
It's a caricature.
ravissary79, You don’t like Billy Graham?
Why, i received the H.S.when i prayed the sinners prayer at 6 years now 66, its the start of being a Christian but its the only start. We are still called to sacntification by obedience and good works see Titus.
david janbaz, it’s not the start. The sinner’s prayer is really poor theology.
@@MYKEDANGER then why did God send me the H.S.?
Thanks for doing the hard work of actually listening, Matt. Even when it's your own tradition! :-) What an amazing thing it is to hear through "new ears." I too had that experience with this interview. I spent many years in the EFCA, and evangelical tradition that has so many strengths. However, my current faith path has me pilgriming in the "Land Episcopal," so I'm hearing things from a different perspective at this point in my life, and that's not bad at all. Here's to change and growth!
"You can't put drums to hymns."
All Christian metal/rock bands: challenge accepted.
In our church we sing hymns with drums in country style.
In my church hymns are played with drums and electric guitar😂
Page CXVI
You are serving the Lord in such a unique way, Matt! I LOVE the delivery of your videos, and even more so, the things that I LEARN from them. Thank you thank you thank you!!
Every single Church Father from the early Church professed the real presence in the Eucharist, the necessity of Baptism, and the necessity of the order of Bishops.
Every early church father... I call baloney on that.
God bless you my friend. Love the channel; credit to your faith, curiosity and work ethic! And I must say, this video made me more hopeful than ever that your appreciation of history might eventually bring you home to the historical faith. :)
Faith to actions! This is the Catholic position. Faith is connected to your works (actions). Not based upon actions only!
Jacob Laan yeah action is the fruit of your faith and relationship, our actual works mean nothing to God, and in fact isn’t worshiping God either
@@Kryptic712 "faith without works is dead"...from the bible. Catholic tradition is most biblical
Blake Place believe in Jesus and believe what he asked us to DO. Is in the Bible
@@njohn6995
Of course catholics believe in Jesus. Just like faith without works is dead, works without faith is dead too.
How does a wife know her husband loves her and vice versa? By just saying they love each other or by the actions they do to show each other the love they have? Both are needed for a marriage to work.
It is the same with our love for God. The works we do is out of love, not to earn favor.
Jacob Laan Yes! I don’t understand this “not through works” thing.
Excellent conversation, Matt! Keep these coming! Great work!
"We're not saved by good works, but for good works." - I've never heard it better stated.
Amen Nick! As James said, and I paraphrase, I will show you my religion by my works.
For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast. For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them.
Ephesians 2:8-10
This was one of the emphases of Martin Luther, who also emphasized that God doesn't need our good works, but our neighbors do.
I say scrap "good works"!!! Seriously, why do good work? No incentive.
@@johnmarquardt1991
You've never read or heard the meaning of the word "sarcasm"?
great, I am a Baptist and had no idea what an evangelical really was. Thank you for this.
Hey Matt, love your videos. Totally help me grow in my own faith.
But I'mma challenge you on one thing. You can think about it and come to your own conclusion -
Baptism is not a work of man; baptism is a work that God does to men. It's like, if I'm washing my dishes it's not the dishes doing the work, it's me. Same with God washing us.
God bless!
That is an analogy i never heard.
And i feel of the 55 comments yet, most of these are from high church tradition
Lutheran?
@@ann-marieb2593 Yep lol. Good ol' medium-church tradition.
@@MathewAlden I don't like high,low or middle church. I just want a good iturgical service. I want to worship the same way the saints before me worshiped. As close as the first Chrisitans did. I don't mind a newer hymn now and again but the modern 'worship' music can stay in my car for the commute.
@@ann-marieb2593 I was just making light of my tradition lol. I don't really care how the worship is done as long as the Message is proclaimed.
I’ve been watching your UA-cam clips, or as you say you’re 10 minute hour. This stuff is really been interesting. I’ve viewed several of them and watching this one it was pretty good. It was heading home. I felt I guess the word I want to say it’s comfortable and what he was saying. So with all of them that I’ve watched Catholic and protestant and all of that I just want to say thank you. It’s a different look a different perspective and it actually helps me to appreciate where I stand and what I believe. I also truly believe the Lord knows what’s in our hearts, and that helps us to set where we’re at. Keep up the good work and again thank you very much.
There was, hidden in his style of delivery, so much incredible wisdom and grace it is stunning. This has been my favorite conversation you’ve had, and should be rewatched by all, especially Protestants. He delivered such wisdom and truth with such gentleness, full of understanding and grace. My husband and I had to stop and rewind and talk every few minutes. We both marveled at his ability to communicate gently without compromising, and both came away saying “I wish I could do that”. But watching videos like this is part of learning it. THANK YOU so much, Matt. So valuable.
I was also afraid that a grizzly was going to rush the deck and eat you. Clear out some of those trees so you can see them coming.
And I hope you find that coffee cup behind you before it gets all moldy.
I was secretly hoping that some cool animal I would walk by as we were talking as well. One of these days something awesome like that is going to happen oh, and I'm just going to leave it there in the background of the video.
I'm really happy you resonated with this one Jennifer, and I really appreciate that you and your husband seem to consistently get what I'm going for with these conversations.
As a Christian, I really enjoy these videos... keep them coming!
Love these talks mate!! You’re very good at it! I haven’t finished the full interview yet! But I can’t help but notice that most of the time you ask a theological question the pastor begins with “I think...” I guess “HIS” understanding and interpretation of scripture is what his theology is based upon.
Do you not think things?
@@EssenceofPureFlavor hi my friend. Of course I think things. The point I was trying to make is that every time the pastor is asked a theological question he always answers with “I think” or “I believe” etc etc. he is his own authority; and whatever interpretation of the bible he comes up with is his truth. That’s not the way Christianity was set up. Hope that made sense. Take care and God bless.
I enjoyed this convo so much. Thank you!
7:40. This is where this pastor perfectly shows where he gets the sacrements/ordinances wrong.
It's not a covenant "we" made or are making.
It's a covenant God made, and is keeping.
It's not to show what we believe or have done. It's to show what God has done and is doing.
And that's how it's been since Genesis 15.
A covenant is an agreement. God offered the covenant, but it is up to us to accept it. It is not unilateral, it is bilateral, but is impossible without God's initiation. Being baptized and taking communion are outward signs of obedience to God's commands and they acknowledge God's actions that bring salvation. They are not necessary for salvation. Remember the thief on the cross with Jesus. He was saved without either.
@@drkenshaw
It is not unilateral, it is bilateral, once the covenant is entered into ...... but it is highly asymmetric.
Only one of the parties can initiate the covenant, God, and that is His choice to do so.
Only one of the parties can keep the covenant perfectly, God.
Only one of the parties can hold the covenant together, God, despite the fact that we often break the terms of it.
That is why the sacraments are symbols of what God has done, not anything that we do. God does the washing (baptism), and God does the blood shedding (communion).
@@erc9468 I agree with you. Good way of saying it.
I have rejected evangelicals because of their emphasis on nationalism, morality etc... I thank this Pastor for clarifying his view on those issues! For me it is was and always is the gospel of Christ Jesus. 🙏
Evangelical is an international interdenominational theologically label that most of U.S.-American secular media mistakes for a political ideology due to the Republican Party desperately trying to convince Evangelicals to vote for them in exchange for maintaining socially conservative (cultural conservative) values (which they don’t even do a good job of) and Pew Research Center in their survey data nomenclature reinforcing the false Evangelical vs People of Color (POC) dichotomy where they split Evangelicals (who are multicultural/diverse) into Evangelical (erroneously synonymized with White Evangelical), Black Protestant (combing both Black Evangelicals and Black Mainline Protestants into one undifferentiated category making it difficult for the general public/media to compare without access to raw data due to non-matching variables brought about by not providing data or survey questions differentiating between Black Evangelicals and Black Mainline Protestants although many of the most prominent Historically and Majority Black denominations being Evangelical in theology), and ignoring other POC Evangelicals or combing them with Pew’s mostly White-Normative defined “Evangelical” category. The thing is it’s mostly White Evangelicals that vote Republican (a good chunk of them being conservative on social and economic issues or are single-issue social conservative voters that believe that economic issues take a back seat over social) while Black Evangelicals tend to vote Democratic (although they mostly hold socially conservative values, and theologically conservative beliefs, they tend to be economically progressives because they actively feel the effects of being on the lower end of the socioeconomic totem-pole). If Pew splits the data into White Evangelical, Black Evangelical, Other Evangelical, White Mainline, Black Mainline, Other Mainline, and Confessing Movement and then regrouped White, Black, and Other Evangelicals into the Evangelical category, it would drop the prevalence of Evangelicals voting Republican (Political Conservative) down to an extent within their data because it will correct for the missing Black Evangelical data (that was combined with Black Mainline to create the undifferentiated Black Protestant variable) that voted Democrat (Political Liberal/Progressive).
James 2:19 - You say you have faith, for you believe that there is one God. Good for you! Even the demons believe this, and they tremble in terror.
Acts 2:28 - Peter replied, “Each of you must repent of your sins and turn to God, and be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins. Then you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.
Matthew 7:21 - “Not everyone who calls out to me, ‘Lord! Lord!’ will enter the Kingdom of Heaven. Only those who actually do the will of my Father in heaven will enter.
perhaps i'm stupid, but what are you trying to say?
@@petervandermeij -You are not stupid.
I do understand him saying that while it is entirely and only by God's grace that we are saved, that salvation becomes interactive. There are responsibilities God places on the believer. Obeying these is not what saves us, but having faith is more than merely believing the way we define believing today. Faith is also obedience. And without that obedience we do not have saving faith.
If it were merely believing the demons would be saved as they see Him face to face and therefore believe.
Living up to our responsibility as a believer is not a 'saving work'. It is the fruit of a saving faith.
I didn’t think this would be interesting, but it totally was. I, like you, have an evangelical background. I’ve mainly grown up in Baptist churches, but also Ev Free. In the past 6 or so years, I’ve been searching out other traditions, mainly Presbyterian, Anglican, and Methodist, which has really helped flesh out my understanding of God and church history and tradition. So hearing you dive deep with an evangelical pastor was both nostalgic and also made me think. I hadn’t realized it, but I still hold that “major on the majors, and minor in the minors” viewpoint, which I do think is a good way of looking at things. I don’t even think I knew where that phrase came from, but it’s something I’ve heard many times in my upbringing. Anyway, thank you for these videos and I hope you continue doing them! It’s rare to find such thoughtful honest discussions about denominational differences.