Jan Hus was given several chances to repent before they burned him, but he refused to go against his convictions. I’m absolutely not a Christian but I really respect Jan Hus for his bravery. Such an inspiration.
As a prior protestant, and now Catholic, well done! Love the truth and facts of history not found in the bible. Thanks RZ!!! God bless you - With Love as Jesus Loves
7:43 - Wish you talked a little more about his beliefs. Tyndale believed in baptism by immersion, a memorial view of the eucharist, a literal understanding of Scripture, translating the Bible not just into English but from the original languages instead of Latin.
10:40 - The Catholics did not just go "a bit" to far, their Marian devotion was a huge problem for the Reformers. Yes, many Reformers believed by default in some doctrines like the perpetual virginity. But they also warned against how the devotions to Mary was taking the place of Christ (one reason why Solus Christus is so important).
Well the Catholic Church doesn’t say that Mary is essential for Salvation. The church teaches that without Jesus there is no other way. Just not that you can have faith alone, and then disobey God in every other aspect of your life and expect that he’ll give you the gift of grace and salvation (which is never EARNED).
This unfortunately kept me out of the Catholic Church. I love Catholics, I love the Catholic Church, I love the history. I was able to get past a lot of things like purgatory, the papacy, transubstantiation, etc… I just could not get past the Marian dogmas and devotion… So I knew I could never truly be Catholic because deep down inside I just didn’t believe in them. I’d be lying to myself. That, and seeing Marian devotion in practice made it even worse. Who knows.. Maybe God will bring me to Rome one day, but for now my conscious just isn’t there.
@Redeemed Zoomer I am not a Protestant, but I deeply respect them. Luther's determination, Calvin's discipline, Zwingli's courage and the faith of the others all contributed to such a beautiful Protestant worldview. I've been following your work for a while now and overall, thank you for these many quality videos. On this day, let Christians (or at least Protestants for sure) remember these great people. God bless you!
Ex-catholic here, thank you for this. If more Catholics knew about the bloody, corrupt history of their magisterium there would be more Classical Protestants.
When are you you going to make another one of those, "Understanding Denominations" videos? I really want to see Oriental Orthodoxy, Assyrian church of the East, Pentecostal, Anglican, Methodist, and Congregationalist. Also Happy Reformation Day!!!!!!!
1:45 clever that you play, “O Mighty Fortress is Our God” in the background since Martin Luther actually wrote that hymn and it’s one of my favorites:)
Great Video and Happy Reformation day! I do wish RZ would have talked about Balthasar Hubmair, an early Anabaptist theologian. What is very interesting and cool about him is that he was not as radical as most other Anabaptists. He held a high view of Baptism, Mary, and frequently quoted the church fathers. As a traditional Baptist who holds to the Baptists Confessions, I am very inspired by Balthasar, and wish more people knew of him.
Based video, this is one of my favorite formats you use. I'd love a video on St. Bernard of clairvoux, he seems like he has some proto protestant tendencies
A Hussite here. Nice vid. Just saw a vid from Voice of Reason about Huss and it's the most historically inaccurate vid i've seen
Час назад
I still think that when Jesus told "this is my flesh and this is my blood" he did not say "this is symbol of flesh and blood" So if I'd be protestant, I'd rather be Lutheran. But I'm not, and I'm catholic. Mainly because I disagree with iconoclasm, and I don't have any problem with papal supremacy.
While non-denominational, I am closest "philosophically" to Thomas Cranmer and John Wesley. And I love Thomas Cranmer. And I'm a Calvinist now (in general not just double predestination) Thomas Cranmer is a amazing man.
It's unfortunate you didn't include Waldensians. Like Peter Waldo But I understand your exclusion of John Wesley, Charles Wesley, and George Whitefield. As they technically came long after the reformation
@@Thatoneguy-pu8tyIt is also crazy that the Word of God spoken by the Profets and the Apostles has more authority than what a bunch of humans have to say. Crazy.
@@anycyclopedia And? We should always protest against whatever entity or person or power attempts to smother the pure and true gospel, in which the righteousness of God is revealed, by faith from first to last, so that the just might live by faith.
Very curious RV, what do you read for your research? I appreciate how well informed your videos are. Always wondered if you’re reading“church history” books or just The internet
Hey Brother, thank you for the videos. I am rediscovering the reformed faith because of you and yours suggestion. From Bruce Gore to The Mystical Presence of John Nevin and Turretini. From a Brasilian Presbyterian PS.: (What do you think about Systematics like Berkof? Never seen you talk about it and here in Brazil the first thing you do to know a little more is to read the Institutes of Calvin and the Systematic of Berkof (I've started but stopped sometime in the past))
@@Janika284 Denying key doctrines, changing the Bible, refusing church correction. They were already heretical for being Catholic, then they made it worse.
I understand why you generalized baptists and put them over on the "not part of the reformation" side but I'm one of your Baptist listeners here to remind you that there were two separate streams that created what we now call baptist. There was the ana baptist tradition deriving from Meno Simons, and then there was the particular baptist tradition born out of the reformed tradition from the Chruch of England Puritan movement. Would be great if you acknowledged this during these types of videos. 1689 LBC fellas are a big part of the Baptist tradition and do value scripture, reason and tradition greatly.
It's amazing how everyone gets the faith all wrong. Just... be a good person; trust on Jesus to save you. That's it. Nothing more to it. Get baptized, because it's a command, and take communion because it's our sacrifice.
Hey you should make a new logo for the anabaptists I think to separate them from the later magesterial baptist movements. Don't want people to get confused and think that the baptist movements come from the anabaptists who they universally denounced!
If you live in West Sussex and want good Reformed teaching, come and join us. I'm teaching through the Heidelberg Catechism at the moment and am a Covenant Seminary (PCA) graduate.
@@redeemedzoomer6053 No. We're independent. But we normally sing a metrical psalm at our evening service (Sing Psalms), I teach Calvin's view on the Lord's Supper, which we have every week.
Predestination is so ridiculous to me because it undermines the existence of free will. What's the point of all the trials of this world if not to exercise our freedom to choose Good? Predestination is like Christian determinism.
@@TheNabOwnzz The deterministic idea that you can wind back the clock of reality and see that all events would reoccur is an oversimplification of the nature of reality. To be determinist, you must assume that time only flows in one direction, and all effects are caused in a linear sort of way. Also about the bible mentioning free will, my understanding is that God is the essence of free will because of how he is described as a person with agency who can make decisions that transcend the material world. The incarnation is to demonstrate that transcendence is possible, that cause-and-effect does not exist in only a linear one-way direction, but rather that it is complex. Part of Christ's teaching, in my understanding, is that with God's grace we can affect change! God is a transcendent cause, not a deterministic cause.
@AndrewTheoRobertMeijer I'm not sure what you mean with the incarnation. How does that invalidate the irrefutable rule of cause and effect? The cause of the incarnation is God's will, and the effect is that God became man. It does not contradict this at all. And i have no idea what you mean by a "transcendent cause", so it would be nice if you could explain this to me. But in the sense that even with Christ's thoughts and deeds here in this world are an effect of a cause, to deny this seems rather inane to me. And moral agency does not contradict determinism; Jonathan Edwards thoroughly refuted that objection in his "Freedom of the Will", which is mandatory reading if you're really a seeker into this subject.
@@AndrewTheoRobertMeijer if men love the darkness, they won’t choose the light. Hence they cannot freely choose the light since they love the darkness. All men are slaves to sin until broken free and become slaves to Christ.
@@TheNabOwnzz From my perspective today, if determinism is true, then agency is illusory. So, I'd be wise to look into your recommended reading. A transcendent cause is a cause that comes from the future or from another realm of existence. Every effect has a cause, but this doesn't mean that all effects are caused deterministically.
One question about Anglicanism I haven't been able to find a solid answer for: Are the majority of Anglicans Calvinist/believers in predestination? The emphasis on pointing out the Calvinistic ideas of the founders of Anglicanism would seem to suggest that Calvinism in the current Anglican church is more variable. And a follow-up question, are there any significant differences between Anglicans and Episcopalians, or is their "split" mainly geographical?
Episcopalians are a subset of Anglicanism, who are generally very liberal. Anglicanism does not support individualistic, Calvinist, predestination. The Homilies, Prayer Book, and even the Articles support Ecclesiastical Election. Cranmer was not a Calvinist, neither was Hooker. Hooker's most famous writing was attacking the Calvinist Puritans. Anglo-Calvinist/Reformed violate the Anglican Formularies just as much as Anglo-Papists/Catholics.
@@drjanitor3747 Reformers: don't speculate who is saved and who isn't You: speculating who is in hell Maybe you'd better follow the reformers? Or idk, if the idea that someone is in hell makes you happy or whatever, then by all means, continue to pretend you're the one who dispenses God's justice.
So does it matter that even luther at the end of his life accepted that he couldn't reform the Catholic church and didn't feel sorrow for the religious and political conflicts he caused? Or is that irrelevant because the idea of a reformation itself was a just response to the papal expansion of power? And if that's the case, why didn't any of the reformers then reexamine Eastern orthodoxy if the Catholic Church was so in need of reform? If the Catholic Church was in disarray and in need of reformation since wycliffe, then when exactly did the Catholic church go astray? and if so, were the orthodox ahead of the curve for not compromise on the filioque?
You can definitely draw parallels between the The Great Schism and the Reformation on account of the fact that both directly were caused by the Pope's claim to absolute authority. That being said, there are still many great differences between EO and Protestantism. The Protestants actually corresponded with the EO Patriarch, and the Patriarch eventually told them to stop contacting him over their differences of belief.
WOW! So many layers, roads, papers, titles, positions, traditions, contradictions??? No wonder Christianity has become feckless and diminished in it's purpose!
Some adjustments I would make: Ursinus was German Reformed, not Dutch. Just because the Dutch use the Heidelberg Catechism doesn't mean that Heidelberg was in the Netherlands. It was from the Palatinate. Are you sure Hooker was saying it's a via media between Catholic and Protestant? I would have thought he'd consider himself Protestant. But I haven't read him properly. Do you have a source regarding the Augsburg Variata? I don't think it was a specific accommodation for Calvin. My impression was rather that Melanchthon kept adjusting the wording, Lutherans got mad when it turned out that Calvin signed on, and then they tried to blame that on the wording, when really, either wording would have been acceptable to Calvin. But I could be wrong on this point. Overall, nice job.
If you're Protestant, then all denominations can be saved. Historically non-Protestants like Catholics and Orthodox think only their denomination is saved regardless of what modern representatives of those churches say
If you are Roman Catholic, Eastern Orthodox, some protestants, etc, the yes, only you and members of your particular human institution will be saved. If you are part of most protestant denominations, you will make the distinction between the visible church, i.e. all living professing members of the Christian faith and the various institutions they build, and the invisible church, which is all true believers living and dead throughout the ages, and can contain members irrespective of which denomination they belong to. The third position is universalism where the belief is that all people are saved irrespective of their faith or lack thereof. The reformed position (which RZ will subscribe to if he is in full agreement with the confessions of his church [PCUSA]) is that of the visible and invisible church.
@@redeemedzoomer6053That's not true at all. Most of the Reformers (Puritans and Dutch Further Reformers especially) believed only the Reformed could be saved. And Lutherans are even more extreme on this.
I dont think it makes sense that only one denomanation can be saved, as long as you repent and believe that Jesus came to the world to save us all you're saved, at least thats my enterpretation
