The interviews with Pastor Schooping (and his channel as well) helped break a 30 year stalemate in my soul that kept me from fully believing that I am a child of God because I wasn't in the true church. I couldn't decide between Rome or Constantinople. Canterbury was as far as I could go. Both Rome and Constantinople made exclusive claims. I so needed someone to push back and peel back the veneer. I'm free of that burden! Thank God!! I am truly free of that burden. I can breath. I can rest. I can trust in God's grace. Thank you.
Thank God he set you free! I was there too at one time. I think Pastor Shooping calls it "an alternative object of faith." I just call it an idol, because that's what it is.
The Catholic apologist Serenus de Cressy wrote that the most difficult argument he faced, is Jn 20:31, "but these are written so that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name." John here testifies that believing his testimony about Jesus, grants spiritual life. But ofcourse the Protestants he was engaging with, so Serenus says, affirmed the same Christ that he did. How then can one say that such people are not members of the Body of Christ, ie., his Church, when Christ has claimed them as his own and has granted them spiritual life?
When I discovered Orthodoxy, I made a 10+ year pit stop in Anglicanism. Rome was never really an option for me because (in my humble, but accurate opinion) all the most objectionable doctrines stem from St. Augustine. Neither did the appeal to Papal authority really carry weight, precisely because I already knew for sure I was a Christian in good standing, both because of and in spite of my Pentecostal upbringing. Anglicanism was the best choice for me for a long time, precisely for the reason you mentioned. Eventually though, I could no longer tolerate being in communion with Calvinists (sorry Calvinists), so I made the decision to move my Anglo-Orthodox heart on over to Orthodoxy proper. For me, it was what I needed for the salvation of my soul. That being said, there is an impenetrable fog of history. Choosing between Rome, the East, or something else is ultimately a judgment we have to make and be accountable for, because there is no choice which is clear to everyone -- if there were, the other choices would give up and join it. My advice to anyone considering a monumental change in their Church allegiance -- do it very slowly with as much information as you can, from sources just like this one (Slim's comment, and the video). On the sane Orthodox side of the debate, you might be interested in an article by Fr. John Cox entitled, "Can You Baptize Without Baptizing?" He discusses reception without re-baptism, application of the canons, and he disabused me of the common notion that strict application of canons is normal, and relaxing them by "economy" is less valid.
@@joachim847 Dr. Ortlund is a Calvinist. It's simply the systematized belief that God is good and we are not. One might also recognize it by a different name; Christianity.
@@Death2Compromiseanyone who says they are the one true church is most certainly not. Only nut bags say these stupid things and really just belong to cults fueled by man made triditions who dont have a single clue what.the true church really is
@@Tornadospeed10 He's not wrong. If a baptist and orthodox christian believe that Jesus is God and he came down to die for your sins, was resurrected and will come again to judge the living and the dead... You guys believe in the same Jesus Christ lol
@@asto5767 well within that statement there are so many intricacies to what we mean. You could also say the same for Mormons too. Mormons claim they believe Jesus is God and their savior as well. But when you break that up, you find out they mean something different than you do.
Hi, Gavin, loving your channel, it's very erudite and respectful. I'm a Latin American Roman Catholic. I always had trouble with the same things you two discussed here. The thing is I always searched for the most simple way of living the Gospel. While the RCC has an amazing vault of spiritual and theological resources, it rings hollow to me because of obstacles like the bloated Mariology, for instance. This would make the delights of anthropologists and historians alike, but for a layman, this kills the joy of belonging to this very ancient church. I'm sort of 'drifting' away into Protestantism (not afraid), but it all gets a little anxiety- inducing. Please pray for me! Love from Argentina!
praying for you!! dive into the Bible like never before. the Holy Spirit gives us understanding! “Now we have received not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit who is from God, that we might understand the things freely given us by God. And we impart this in words not taught by human wisdom but taught by the Spirit, interpreting spiritual truths to those who are spiritual. The natural person does not accept the things of the Spirit of God, for they are folly to him, and he is not able to understand them because they are spiritually discerned.” 1 Corinthians 2:12-14 The Gospel is not meant to be confusing. the Bible says God is not a God of confusion but of peace and unless you become like a child you will not enter the kingdom of Heaven. May the Lord bless you and cover you with His peace and joy that surpass all understanding :)
This is really helpful, thank you. I've been trying to understand Eastern Orthodoxy, but listening to Eastern Orthodox priests and interviewees hasn't been as helpful as I hoped. They assume I understand their philosophy and vocabulary more than I really do, haha. So learning from a former Orthodox priest, who understands both Protestant and Orthodox thought processes, helps me comprehend it better.
What philosophy you are talking about .all philosophical methodologies cant drive to any reall knowledge about the Deity . At least educate yourself correct
Actually all philosophical methodologies to know about God in orthodoxy are seen as heresy.read the synodicon of orthodoxy to know about the Deity is not by some philosophical methodologies but through the spiritual levels of the life in the Holy Spirits grace. Purification illumination Theosis that is to experience God in his divine uncreated majestic Glory.
What a blessing this has been. I am a Protestant who has recently started reading about church history. It had me questioning the validity of my faith with antiquity being held up as a plumbline. This has elevated my concerns brother. Thank you both so much.
remember the first beliver in YAHUSHA (JESUS) are jewish-christian they belive in YAHUSHA and kept the torah (law) of God, we see even after the cruxifiction they kept the law of Moses as evidence in Luke 23:56 where we see the women keeping the sabbath day. also i belive the church Historian Eusibieus (i think i spell it wrong ) says the name of first 15 bishops of Jerusalem who were Judeo-christians and who are of hebrew origin. the jewish bishop stop around A.D. 135 where Hadrian had enough of the 2nd jewish revolt and thus outlaw jewish practice in Jerusalem and then Hadrian set up gentile-bishop in Jerusalem who the first gentile bishop i belive His name was Marcus.
@@giovanni545and the apostle Paul a Jew of Jews had to completely fight of the jews who were trying to get gentiles to basically become jewish and follow Torah and get circumcised etc. So yeah it makes sense that the jewish followers of JESUS to also continue in Judaism , but that is not for the gentiles and acts chapter 15 is not the starter kit for Judaism either
@@giovanni545also real Jewish scholars with PhDs in ancient languages say that the messiahs name was spelled and pronounced YESHUA so your wrong there. And another thing is the jewish people as a whole have rejected JESUS and only a tiny minority believe in Him today. So until the fullness if the gentiles comes in the jewish people will remain blinded. We true christians keep the moral aspects of the law , but nit the rituals and JESUS/YESHUA is our sabbath rest so we true christians let NO ONE judge us on these things for they where just shadows of things to come.
@@adamguy33 we must keep in mind with apostle Peters warning of apostle Pauls letter as stated in 2 Peter 3:14-17 where Peter warns of how Pauls letter one can miss understand and lead one to there own destruction. also a exemple of how Pauls letter are hard to understand is this in Galatian Paul gave a scary warning to the galatian saying "you have fallen from grace" because they were trying to get circumcise right? well with that in mind why the apostle Paul circumsice a beliver whos name is Timothy? He did it so Timothy could accompany Him in evengalizing but Timothy did not fall from grace because Paul circumsice Him, so then whats going with galatian then?? we also gotta keep in mind in galatian Paul confess that everyone was against Him for judiazing the gentile converts, Peter,the man from James and even Barnabas was with them on gentile convert Judiazing.
@@giovanni545 well that was a then and has nothing to do with today. Judaism, Muslim , hindu Buddhism is all dead religions and people who follow them jew or gentile will go to hell. We as true chriatians today are not to conform or confirm Judaism in anyway. The old covenant is dead and the new one has replaced it and true christians have freedom from the law. The transformational time is over and the nail in the coffin of Judaism happened in 70 A.D.. I am under the law of Christ and not the law of Moses. Pauls heart was for his people, but after time he shock the dust off of his feet and moved on to the plan of God to bring in the gentiles and call a people that were not His . And if you are a gentile and not a Jewish person trying to go under the law that you can not keep in the first place then you will no longer be under Grace. All torahism and Hebrew roots people are decieved
I'm very thankful for your channel and these conversations. I struggle with the ecclesiastical anxiety you have described and have found great value here.
Its concerning to see how many people see living/preaching the gospel is to simply live online, searching videos about people leaving orthodoxy to mob the comments section and claim superiority. Un-Christian behaviour. The best Christians likely aren't even online, being far too busy supporting their families and helphng the poor.
So nice to see people being kind and accepting in the comment section. Finally...... normally there is so much anger towards people with opposing views. We as Christians just need to remember to speak the truth in love.
Many of us went the opposite way, from Protestantism to Orthodox Christianity. Could you host a debate, in which both parties verbalize their points? Thanks!
In my experience, and this has just been my experience. People transit from one tradition to another, usually from what they were raised in to something else, based on arguments they can't answer. In my experience, few people can defend the faith they were raised in as well as the faith they transit into. Nicea 2 is devastating to modern Orthodox and Catholic views on iconography, I suggest studying it.
@@thadofalltrades , . The Catholic and Orthodox position holds that because God the Son took on human flesh in his Incarnation, it was possible to depict the Son in the icons. John of Damascus anticipated the main thrust of Calvin’s argument against icons when he argued that the Old Testament injunction against images was given in order to prevent the Israelites from attempting to represent the invisible God. He noted however that the situation changed with the Incarnation. There are strong historical evidence in support of the use of icons in the early Church. The Dura-Europos church has been dated to the pre-Constantine period which means that the notion widespread among Evangelicals that Emperor Constantine caused the early Church to fall from apostolic purity into the ceremonialism and sacerdotalism of Roman Catholicism is plain wrong. I challenge you to respond to deal with the theological defense presented by the Seventh Ecumenical Council (Nicea II) and other early Church Fathers, e.g., John of Damascus’ classic defense of the icons - that the prohibition against images apply not to the Incarnation of the Son.
One of my clients was consumed by the question about who had the authority to give the Eucharist. She kept researching who had the real power from Christ. In the meantime, she didn't seem to really know the Lord in her daily life. I never really knew what to say to her, but just prayed. I hope she finally learned to put her trust in Christ, because He alone saves us through faith alone.
Amen! I see so many people searching, deeply searching for the right system. They move from this to that, then become unsatisfied with that and move to something else. They'll never be fully satisfied because Christ isn't at the center of it.
@@78LedHead the Eucharist is exactly Christ st the center! If your study and investigation leads to confusion, that isn’t always the fault of the thing you investigate…
@@78LedHead Right! This desperation for getting the monopoly of God's Grace and Power is really damaging to Christ mission. It looks to me as the perfect example of human struggle to control over others.
@@TheB1nary True indeed, and I'm certainly not perfect. There are very personal things in scripture, though, things that you or a Pope or any priest can't take away from me. God was able to convey a message to me through words, through men. The Eucharist doesn't = salvation. "This is my body" doesn't now mean "if you don't partake of this in the Catholic church or Orthodox church you aren't saved." Christ came not to burn the heathen friend, he came to save him.
@@78LedHead Do you believe Jesus when he said he would build his Church? do you trust scripture when it tells you where to go to find the truth? Jesus and scripture are in accord. The point is if you trust Jesus at his word that he started a church and that he gave that church authority than if takes away the uncertainty. The problem I see here is that people are distrusting Jesus and trying to make sense of things on there own. Lets trust Jesus at his word. Ref MT 16:18-19, Mt 18:15-17 Lev 17:8-10 1 Tim 3:15 Eph 3:7-11
I’ve been attending Orthodox services now for about 2-3 months. I’m not ready to convert to orthodoxy, however I can say with full certainty that I’ve never felt closer to God than when I started shifting my perspective to the Eastern rather than western. I desire to be conformed to Christ’s image, and unlike my past, I’ve actually taken the steps to do it. No other church has brought this about within me. When I had left the faith for the New Age movement, there was nothing like this. This is a whole new experience for me.
Stay the course brother and don’t convert until you are ready, there is no rush. By God’s grace I was received into the Orthodox Church in August of last year
Brother, as a fellow ex-newager saved by Christ all I can tell is don't go for the spiritual experience (like we typically used to do in the new age) to define what's truth. Go for the Word of God and your house will be built on solid rock. One thing that I'm soo repulsed by is the worship/veneration of Mary. After 15 years of worshipping/venerating all kinds of deities and saints I know without a shadow of doubt that those entities are NOT the real saints, but demons in disguise. After the dead line is crossed there is no communication with the dead. God explicitly forbids talking to the dead (although they're technically alive, in the presence of God). God is a Jealous God and doesn't like to share His glory, all of our worship, prayers, faith and trust should go directly to Him and no one else. May He blesses you 💓
@@denissaarsova5996 I agree that we cannot commune with the dead. The orthodox do not claim to commune with the dead, but rather with those who have moved on to be alive with Christ in heaven. The priest has expressed that they do not commune with the dead. As far as the veneration of Mary or the saints, do you believe that it is ONLY worship when the Orthodox venerate these icons? I’ve listened to debates and lectures on icon veneration, and I can’t find a very solid Protestant rebuttal. As far as the veneration of Mary, what specifically do you find troubling regarding that? Upon reading your comment again, I’d say it further solidifies the orthodox view. They also aren’t praying to saints. They are communing them in order to gain their petition, but to say that they are praying to saints is I think inaccurate. Let me know your thoughts
@denissaarsova5996 There’s nothing new age about the ancient Christian Church which continues today in Orthodoxy. The modern “Christian Churches” are spiritually dead which is obvious and tragic. As you even admit the saints are not dead. God is the God of the living not the dead. No saints are worshipped in the EO church so there is no reason for God to be jealous. The deep veneration of St. Mary is proper and an ancient tradition rooted in scripture. The oldest Christian prayer we have is to her. The Roman catacombs have prayers to the saints written in the walls with holy images where ancient Christians under persecution held services. 1st Corinthians and Revelation tells us the the saints are on God’s divine council and will judge the world.
Hey brother! Checking the Word of God (also Early church history, before Christianity got political and "forced" as official religion) we can't find any form of going towards anyone else but God/Jesus. "There's only one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus" (1 Tim 2:5). Even angels don't communicate with people on earth if not specifically sent with a mission by the Lord and don't answer our requests/calls. They don't accept any form of adoration, but always point back to God. Btw in the new age you know that typically angels are called/used as guides, but those are clearly demons. Saints are also "channeled". Nothing, no one from heaven answers our calls other than Jesus Himself, because it is dangerous (check new age to jesus testimonies if you haven't). As for Mary - it is so clear how pagan societies started projecting their goddess cults onto her. Read the Bible - the only place someone tried to give even a hint of praise to her Jesus immediately stopped them and pointed their focus to the Word of God (Luke 11:27-28). And the images - again, anything else used as mediator to God rather than Jesus Christ opens portals to the demonic. No difference with pagan statues/images. We have Him, brother, and He's more than enough 💓 He's God Himself.... Why going to all of those other beings and not go directly to our Maker that knows us best, that even died for us so that we can walk with Him having His Holy Spirit inside of our hearts💗
I've known Pastor Joshua for a long time. He is a great person. I might think there are good defenses for the Catholic/Orthodox view on these points, there is no denying that Joshua (and Gavin) present a worthy challenge that deserves a careful look. I estimate 9/10 Catholics and Orthodox will respond to these points from emotion rather than a slow analysis from history, logic, and the sources of divine revelation. Let there be true dialogue in charity.
Erick and Gavin, you are my go to people for honesty in discussion of these topics. I don’t think I’ve seen more intellectual honesty than with you two. Thanks for what you guys are doing for Christ.
We would appreciate it if you'd find the time to answer some of these objections, Erick, as you are more learned than most of us here and I think these are matters that would lead people astray. I jumped to certain timestamps and watched to see what Pastor Joshua has to say, and from what I've seen so far, I think the points he (and Gavin) raised are very much answerable, especially on venerating icons and Mariology. I'd like to share my thoughts on these objections myself, but I've been busy as of late and couldn't set aside time to put up a detailed response. And of course, it's always better to hear from more learned theologians such as you.
I've left Eastern Orthodoxy 25 years ago. Since then my whole family did so. Same story with my sister's husband family. All left eastern orthodoxy. Many such other examples in our church. In eastern Europe, fundamentalism and decadence of EO is comparable and probably worse than you ever saw in american evangelicalism. The EO churches there, seem to have lost contact with society. Most of their people are either uneducated having some kind of superstitious idolatrous religion or heavily becoming atheists. People talk everywhere about the decadence of the West as the East would do better. Actually, the East has never been too transparent. The EO in the west are living in a bubble. Their protestant tendencies would probably not even fit in an eastern european eo church, but somehow, for political reasons, in America is fine...
@@IC_XC_NIKA That answer was directed to @Benjamin Eby, not to you. I considered your question quite irrelevant and did not hurry to answer, but if you insist, then I can tell you this. I am a Christian, a Christ follower. In Christ, there are only Christians, nothing more.
@@stefang.9763 Right because every other protestant denomination sect with their varying beliefs outside of Eastern Orthodox Christianity is "Christian" and the Orthodox aren't lol 😉
I found there to be great defenses to many of the arguments laid out here. People come to the EO Church for a variety of reasons. If they come for any other reason but Christ it will ultimately not be sufficient. When looking at why people leave the church that seems to be the common theme. The comments section is no place to adequately respond to the arguments laid out here. I just hope that strong opinions and positions about the church are not formed without personally giving the orthodox life a chance with an open mind. The faith is so much more than what we just think that our decision must be informed by the life as much as the literature.
What would you respond to someone who says “there is so much more to Mormonism, or to Islam, than what we *think*” - and that it must be lived to be properly evaluated?
@@GB-ji1sv What would you say to someone who says they have the correct interpretation of the Holy Scriptures because they believe the Holy Spirit is with them, yet, their interpretation is drastically different from yours (which you also believe comes from the Holy Spirit). Who is right, and why? Why is your exegesis and interpretation more accurate than the Muslim or Jehovah Witness? What authority governs this? If it's the Holy Spirit, where does He speak his final judgment on the matter? Because the fruits on your end, are just as good as the fruits on the Jehovah Witness' end, they do much evangelism, and they are often more passionate and willing to give up their entire lives for their beliefs. By what authority do you say your exegesis is more correct than theirs when their fruits have the potential to be greater than yours?
Well, the pagan idolatry that’s in your church and the different gospel you teach is a strong repellent to The Beliefs of The Early Church and will make Christians run away ultimately, youre the modern day Pharisees preaching dead traditions and a false gospel.
@@ramichahin2you simply lack knowledge on what “idolatry” is lol. If we go off the second commandment alone, you and me are both idolaters for having computers or phones with images of what is on earth…. But we’re not, because you require more than an English reading if exodus to understand idolatry because I mean, didn’t got instruct Moses to create golden cherubim and said he’d dwell between them in Exodus? That is certainly a statue and image of what is in heaven.
Uuummm...... "And if he shall neglect to hear them, tell it unto the church: but if he neglect to hear the church, let him be unto thee as an heathen man and a publican. Verily I say unto you, Whatsoever ye shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever ye shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven." ~ Matthew 18:17-18 "They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would no doubt have continued with us: but they went out, that they might be made manifest that they were not all of us." ~ 1 John 2:19
Tell me a simple question as you where an orthodox which word is on Jesus Christ orthodox icon and from where in scripture that is taken. Supposed as an being an orthodox you knew that simple thing
That was an awfully short hour. I had to check to see if I was running the video at normal speed. Thanks for giving the Rev ample time to make his points without interrupting him. It facilitates the formation of a clear memory in an old brain.
@@EmberBright2077 she supposed was an orthodox just ask her which is the mani word in orthodoxy that shows Deity taken from scripture original language text she has no idea.
@@cpSharkBlast as for me, I was already made aware at 12 years old that there exists the Orthodox Church by my mentor. Like the Reformers, I too share their positive leanings towards Eastern Orthodoxy. I should know I used to have a section in my writings dedicated to my admiration on the EO more so than the Roman Church. However, I do not deem conversion necessary since whether they like it or not both EO and Protestantism have commonalities namely: 1.) The Lord Jesus Christ is the head of the Church not the Pope. 2.) Purgatory is a non-essential doctrine. 3.) Certain ranks of the priesthood can marry. (Though Protestantism takes this further.) 4.) Greater use of the Greek New Testament. Further, it is also part of the EO's history that there was a controversial Patriarch, Cyril Lukaris. By the way, even people within the EO are divided over whether or not he espoused Calvinist leanings, some conceded at various degrees to this while others say he branded Protestantism as heresy. They thought his openness towards Protestantism was nothing more than his political maneuvering to keep his Protestant friends happy . On my part however, I am in doubt that he did the latter since he did sponsor the translation undertaken by the monk Maximos into the Greek of his day. Of which I do hope despite being poor can buy a copy of it in his memory in the future. I should mention that I listen to Orthodox hymns like Psalm 135 and maybe Otche Nash. Πιστεύω εις τον Κύριον Ιησούν Χριστόν και μένω εις αυτόν εις τους αιώνας, αμήν. Credo in Dominum Iesum Christum et maneo in eum in aeternum, amen. (Still practicing both of these 😊) As I've always said, I am an Orthodox but not Eastern and a Catholic but not Roman. I set both professions in Christ. Thank you for your patience and God bless.
I would like to object to the opinion about the Most Holy Theotokos. It was said that it is impossible to turn with a prayer, for a blessing to Christ, if you are not blessed by the Virgin Mary ... This is not so. There is no such relationship in Orthodoxy. But what is there? Perhaps this can be called the word "love". The Most Pure Virgin, whose prototype in the Old Testament was the ladder to heaven, and also the burning bush, etc. - this is an amazing Virgin, Mother of Christ, and Mother of all of us (we believe that Christ on the cross in the person of John adopts all of humanity to Mary). With God, everyone is alive, and - here is the amazing thought of Eastern Christianity - Mary has already risen! Christ rose from the dead and will never die. The prophet Elijah was taken alive to heaven, and he will die, and then he will rise again. Mary the Virgin has already died, and God has already resurrected her - for a new eternal life. What a theological idea! The first after Christ, without waiting for the Last Judgment and the general resurrection, Mary has already risen. We love her very much. She does not obscure Christ in Orthodoxy, but in loving Christ, we cannot but love His mother. And I myself personally feel her love for me - and this is expressed, among other things, in amazing miracles associated with prayers to her.
What an absolute joke. The byline on this video says "Truth Unites," yet Protestantism is broken into thousands of different sects, each believing something different. Here are men who think that they are smarter than the greatest saints of Christianity at the time when Christianity was wrestling with issues of Christ's deity and natures.
They can’t see the confusion, division & scandal of 000’s of sects caused by personal interpretation which is not of Jesus who willed unity Jn 17 11-23. Every single Protestant is guilty of disunity. No liturgical sacrificial worship in Protestantism as commanded by Jesus Jn 6 51-58, so not “church”, more like a synagogue with prayer & teaching
If only they read the letters of the Church fathers, the fathers have quelled the common burning questions about EO and reassured those looking into it
@@ApologeticGamer What made you leave Orthodoxy? I've never been, and never been a bit drawn to it, but some are very much. They seem to see it as more devout. It does seem to have a cultish aspect in its claim to being the only way to salvation. The Orthodox seem to me a pretty cold branch of Christianity. It doesn't seem to engender the love the bible inspires us to have, and it's the most legalistic branch of Christianity I've come across.
@@ApologeticGamer I'm baptized and raised evangelical protestant, but kinda grew disenchanted with how much their worship ended up feeling like some sort of "feel good" performance art. And so I always felt drawn to the more ancient church traditions for, what I perceived as their greater understanding of beauty and the sacred. (no one tradition in particular, just in general). but then as I started studying them more, the question of authority kept coming up and realized that every tradition tells you that they're the only way and if you're not part of them, then you're damned and going to hell regardless of your devotion to God and Christ. These are extreme generalities, and I know I could speak to 100 different orthodox or Catholics and they'd all tell me something different. this is just the feeling my anxiety on the topic gives me, hahah.
@@ApologeticGamer I really hope these were truly not your arguments for leaving The Orthodox Church, because they sound purely based upon emotion. However I could be wrong so could you expound what is specifically wrong with exclusivism, and do you yourself not hold to a form of exclusivism in claiming that salvation is only found in Christ? In scripture Matthew 7:13-14 Christ gives an explicit example of how the road and gate to salvation is openly available to all, but he says that it is narrow ( being difficult, trials, pressed upon) and straight. And that there are few that find it. If this isn’t exclusive I don’t know what is. I mean with all due respect to you, Dr. Ortlund, and Josh Schooping this anxiety of Exclusivism being leveled at orthodoxy is falls flat on deaf ears. When if you spent any time following conversations between former Christians many who were reformed Protestants(Calvinist) and former Calvinists who are now non Calvinist. You would realize that there are so many former Calvinist that struggled with anxiety of the doctrine of double predestination and election, of this system. Granted i don’t think that someone’s anxiety of an exclusive claim is a solid enough reason to reject it. The fact remains that this sort of anxiety happens in many different faiths and traditions of faith. And even amongst secularist. Yet I really don’t feel I have seen Dr. Ortlund discuss this much. If he has I’ll admit I was wrong. But if he has addressed it I would love to see his response to those that have battled with anxiety of double predestination, and all of the doctrines of tulip. I mean if he is going to address the issue of exclusivism at least steel man your opponent actually engaging In the meat of his traditions exclusivist claims. Truly the only people that can really have a real issue against any form of. exclusivism would be universalists. Which neither of them are. What they did was pretty much say that this form of exclusivism i disagree with because of my understanding of scripture hence it is wrong. Which is fine but to speak about an emotional state of anxiety as if ecclesial exclusivism is the only form of exclusivism that causes anxiety amongst people is silly. What I find interesting is that the end of your comment you also listed worship of Mary needing to be reformed along with its ecclesial exclusivism than you would consider it again. My question to you and mr Schooping is, is if you truly believe that Orthodox both eastern and oriental, Roman Catholic, Syriac, church of the east, and Coptic Christians worship Mary, than wouldn’t this be idolatry? And if it is idol worship according to you, than isn’t it the case that unless someone stops doing it and repents of that idol worship; wouldn’t it be the case that there is no salvation for them?
@@ApologeticGamer you literally side stepped my critiques, and gave a generic response that doesn’t answer anything. The same Christ of the Bible? Okay so if I hold to double predestination how is this the same God as a non-Calvinist. The doctrines of election and theistic determination fundamentally changes the very nature of God. If you have a different fundamental view of the essence of God than this would logically follow that you don’t serve the same God. Protestants try to deny this is fundamental but honest Calvinist and non-Calvinist at least admit that these 2 positions are in opposition. This is not the only issue, what about Unitarians, or Modalists(which is a heretical form of the trinity) they all proclaim Christ as there Lord and Savior. Yet if you actually understand the differences in these beliefs you would realize that they are incompatible with one another and many especially Unitarians would reject trinitarians. Yet they still proclaim Christ as God and place their faith and trust in him. But many of them would call trinitarians heretics and outside of salvation. Once again engage in specifics not in generalizations. You say not some twisted version of Christ. But this begs the question how do you know that the version of Christ you hold to isn’t a twisted version? Yes it is exclusivism regardless if you pretend it’s not. Try and actually read the definition of exclusivism and get back to me if you want I can post it. Exclusivism has an objective definition. As far as the Orthodox Church not accepting you, we’ll this is from your perspective. For instance if the Orthodox Church is the True Church (the body of Christ) and their ecclesiology is correct. than to be outside of the body of Christ is to be outside of Christ. For how is it that one can have salvation outside of Christ. You can say, just as I can, or even a Unitarian, a modalist, Mormon, Jehovah witness, Calvinist. That we trust In Christ that the Bible teaches. But at the end of the day this begs the question as to who has the right Christ, the right gospel. Which they all fundamentally have different understandings of who Christ is which objectively changes the very nature of the gospel. So it’s not a matter of rejecting you. It’s a matter of truth. people that care about truth and are consistent would acknowledge that these doctrinal differences changes who Christ is and every doctrine that follows from it and how we are saved. It is a matter of not sacrificing truth for the sake of a false unity. Which is what many Protestants especially evangelicals do( I know I used to be one) Which is why the Orthodox Church saying their is no salvation outside the Church is a consistent doctrine that a majority of the Church fathers themselves held to. Even the reformers held to this however they had a different ecclesiology( but their ecclesiology was not as loose and open the way you are purposing and what many modern evangelicals and Protestants proclaim today) So to say the Orthodox Church rejects you is like a Unitarian or Jehovah witness complaining that trinitarian Protestants reject them. Which most trinitarian Protestants do. From the Church’s perspective you reject the church and placed yourself outside. I’m not saying you don’t have your reasons. But it’s merely a matter of from what paradigm or perspective you hold to or coming from. Just like a trinitarian can say no mr Unitarian it’s not that we reject you, it’s that you have rejected God because you reject who God is and have twisted the gospel. This is a form of exclusivism, whether you acknowledged it or not. I’m not saying we cannot be charitable with one another in disagreement or care for someone we don’t agree with. Of course we can. But when engaging in finding truth to make assertions that are inconsistent and side steps the questions than how can we say we care about truth.
This was a great conversation. Very edifying. I consider myself a High Church Evangelical, I hold many positions of Lutherans and Anglicans but I really enjoy the community built around Evangelical churches. Thankfully the Church that I go has Communion every service 🙏🏼 so I can reconcile that bit somewhat. But it has always bugged me that there is this need for establishing the one true Church. I prefer following the one true God, his Word (Living and Written) and let that guide me through the Truth. I love Church History, I love Patristics, Philosophy and Theology. But the more I learn about them the more I realize how much our sin and ignorance permeat in each Confession, solidified as Tradition. I also see God's Love and Truth in each Confession, solidified as Tradition as well. Therefore instead of judging them I take what is edifying and rebuke what I see as incorrect. I know that the argument would be that I become my own Pope or Magisterium, which granted it's a fair argument. But I see the divisions within Catholicism and Orthodoxy that I cannot help but see the contradictory aspects of that argument as well.
So excited to get into this! I was seduced by the art, music and beauty of the EO church for awhile until I figured out the theology and also found myself becoming more and more religious and self righteous towards other Christians due to my efforts rather than being close to Jesus.
“Seduced”? Are you equally “seduced” by contemporary Christian music, art, and “beauty”? Ironically, becoming “more religious” should do the opposite of what you describe as your experience - it should lead to humility. If you think self righteousness is exclusive to EO practise and adherents, you’ve got a shock coming when you spend time in Protestant churches!!
No wonder because in the first place you are seeing your journey as “your own effort.” You started and went through it with a wrong mindset, so much so that you seem to have or have had a distorted view of its art, music and beauty.
@Benjamin Eby These are the teachings which drew me to the Orthodox Church exactly. I desperately want to just “turn it off”, and just focus on defeating passions and evils and self wills. The problem with orthodoxy is that it is lying when it presents itself as simply “the fullness” of Christianity. Historically, it was Christianity in and of itself; anyone outside the Church *is not* Christian. And yet I’ve seen so many who deeply love Jesus Christ, and who has even caused great change inside people towards righteousness outside of the Church. According to St Tikhon though, even the act of worshiping God outside the Church is actually an affront to Him. But even Jesus praised the Samaritan, the schismatic heretic. It’s not so much a problem with Orthodoxy’s modern teachings, but the universal condemnation with which they speak of schismatics and heretics without being able to prove they alone have grace, as I see grace everywhere.
Time-stamps 14:07 - 1 Corinthians 12:3, Buddhists or Mormons wouldn’t pass this test because they wouldn’t say Jesus is Lord in the way Paul understood that. 14:42 , 15:40 - Exclusivist claims. Personal judgment is unavoidable. 16:26 - How conflicts and view of bishops affect ecclesial allegiance. 17:42 - Do we need to become historians to find salvation? At some point, we need to ask: where is the Gospel and New Testament? 19:27 - The doctrine of the church is an item of faith; it’s not an item of calculation and mathematics. 22:45 - The church is unchanged? 23:40 - veneration 25:37 - how long does it take for something to become holy tradition? 26:00 - art in history
Thanks for this video! It would've been really useful to have this video when I was a young teenager. I've recently been listening to you (started with your discussion with Dr. Cooper on Baptismal Regeneration/Infant Baptism) and I appreciate how level-headed you approach these discussions (as well as critical responses to you). As someone who someday prays to be a Pastor, you've been a good example to me on how to discuss theological issues.
@@TruthUnites i see that man never mention as being an orthodox the elder saints experience of Theosis.orthodox theology is based on the experience of purification illumination and Theosis . The difference between orthodox church theology and experience and all western Christianity first im the difference of the methodology each one has to actually know about Deity. That former orthodox actually from his says seems has no idea from all these and see orthodox church theology under the methodology western Christianity does.
Even if nothing has changed from the earliest church fathers in orthodoxy or catholism, let us remember that even during Paul's time, he had to rebuke entire churches, later in Revelation God himself rebuked and encouraged 7 early churches to do better and repent. On top of that Peter himself denied Jesus and had to repent due to Jesus's warning. So the fact that nothing has changed, even if 100% true, does not make it the right gospel. If you go back to what Peter said about denying Christ and take into account Peter's authority to prove his belief is true, that will only lead to a falling away from Christ. Same is true for any of the biggest denominations throughout history. Lack of evidence about other beliefs does not mean an absence of evidence. The biggest institutions will have the support of the emperor, the state, huge funding, numerous scholars and theologians supporting it. This happens even today, an example would be WHO with COVID, how they stated the mask would protect, then it wouldn't, and then doubled down again on their first claim, or that the vaccines would decrease the spread and that was found out later to not be true, or the bat theory. Dozens of scientist signed these claiming them to be true. But this does not mean there were no others refuting these claims, just that they were deplatformed and ridiculed. So all theology in the end, has to bow before the teachings of Christ. And since Christ is the only head of the church and has promised that the gates of hell won't prevail against him church, that he will Sheperd all who call on him and his holy Spirit will lead all to the truth. Please place your faith only on Christ, no church or bishop or pastor or preacher can be the substitute. Follow Christ's teachings, and any doctrine that contradicts must be rebuked and tossed away. Our claim is through faith. While tradition, rituals and practice be damned as they are akin to law in terms that they can not save, only Christ can. So all teaching must be subject to Christ alone.
Recently converted to Orthodoxy, best decision I've ever made. The fullness of the Christian faith is beautiful. The worship of the rational mind in the west has led to the madness of these schisms. This guy was never Orthodox.
I did the same, finding Orthodoxy was the best thing to happen to me, I plateaued in Protestantism it was shallow and unfulfilling, know I actually feel the presence of Christ in church
My Lutheran-dar immediately went off when Schooping appeared on screen. He’s definitely got multiple volumes of Johann Gerhard’s Loci Communes behind him, and I believe I see a copy of the Tappert translation of the Book of Concord as well. The theology of Lutheran Orthodoxy is an excellent though rarely considered midpoint between Arminian and Calvinist theology in the English speaking world. Pretty sure there’s a copy of Jesus and the Eyewitnesses by Richard Bauckham on his other side, too. Also, does anyone else instinctively scan for books they either have or know in videos like these, or am I just weird?
He belongs to Missionary Christian Alliance. Soft-charismatic baptist group. He says he likes their dual focus on gospel/exegesis and sanctification/theosis through emphasized prayer and fasting.
@@j.athanasius9832 I was aware he wasn’t Lutheran, I was just reacting to the Lutheran books on his shelf. (I’m not a Lutheran, either, but I lean toward quite a few Lutheran distinctives, particularly those of post-Luther Lutherans who were a great deal more systematic in their approach to theology than Luther.)
@@theodosios2615 Loci Communes is just Latin for ‘common places.’ Melanchthon was the _first_ to write a theological commonplaces/loci communes (which he did title _Loci Communes_ ) but it created a genre of Lutheran theology in the process (largely as a result of the four subsequent editions of his Loci Communes Melanchthon published during his lifetime as his thinking developed). Just as there are multiple series of Systematic Theology by different theologians that are referred to as a Systematic Theology, there are multiple Loci Communes likewise referred to as such. Johann Gerhard’s 39 volume Loci Communes is often considered the best example of the genre. Concordia Publishing House has been publishing a translation of Gerhard’s under the translated title _Theological Commonplaces_ , though the original title in Latin was _Loci Communes Theologici_ .
@@ΓραικοςΕλληνας I am sure you must be immortal and a needle can't pierce your body as well since you eat the literal flesh and drink the literal blood that gives Eternal life. Since we are at it, does the bread and wine goes digestion and excretion ? If it does, that means everyone partakes in it, since water is recycled and it goes everywhere.
I like to think about the seven churches in revelation. They were not all the same. They all had different issues that God addressed. I see the true church is the churches that bear fruit.
“The one who states his case first seems right, until the other comes and examines him.” Proverbs 18:17 ESV. I’m an evangelical learning more about the historic Christian faith, so you’d think I would side with Joshua Schooping. However, I think these two refutation videos from two Orthodox adequately address Gavin and Joshua’s discussion points. Well worth the listen before taking what Gavin and Joshua say too seriously. ru-vid.com2uQ17ijWWo4?feature=share ru-vid.com1KwztwUWEXE?feature=share In particular, I agree that he seems to be quite unstable to be going back and forth between theological positions over the years and at times almost seems like he was surprised to learn certain aspects of Orthodoxy that he would have had to learn about and ascribe to to become a priest. Additionally, it did seem awfully convenient that he did his testimony with Gavin, and then came out with a book and did another interview. Like it was a pre-promotion sort of thing. Maybe not, but either way, if someone is truly on a journey and also stepping away from something as serious as the priesthood in a certain tradition, I don’t think it is a good idea for them to then jump into being a pastor in another tradition or writing a book that will be taken as spiritual guidance to others. It seems that this scripture applies to his situation both when he became a priest prematurely, as well as now that he has converted to Protestantism in some form. “He must not be a recent convert, or he may become puffed up with conceit and fall into the condemnation of the devil.” 1 Timothy 3:6
A number of the historical objections to Protestantism can certainly be disconcerting and are worth seriously grappling with, but I find the historical objections (especially when tied to the issue of ecclesiastical exclusivity) against EO and the RCC to be just devastating especially once the development of doctrine becomes apparent. Great video as always, Dr. Ortlund. Hopefully you’ll have Joshua back on again!
I grew up Protestant and have been lost in a theological jungle for the past 15 years. No peace… in a world of anxiety trying to figure out which Church is right. So I resonate so much with that portion of this discussion.
Not as long but same. Its only been a few months and im so tired. I could look into the arguments kf the church fathers and maybe i will but tbh just the scripture is still so pregnant with spiritual nourishment that im not dropping the time thats already too small that i spend with that to go and trace the timeline on bickering about whether or not the eucharist is only valid if the bread is unleavened. And so on for every other dispute.
@@callum4337 One thing is for sure... If we are saved by figuring out the correct theological position we are all doomed. I for one am Going with Orthodoxy. Protestantism is simply nonsense after one does get into the earliest witnesses writings.
@@culpepper7665Marian dogma originated in the protoevangelium of James, a gnostic writing. Look into this, please. Also prayer to the saints did not exist until late 3rd century to 4th century. Be very careful.
Keep reading scripture! As far as churches go, I’d recommend a church in the “Pillar Network” you can check out their website. I can attest that these are your best bet when it comes to adhering to the word of God. Here is the rundown: 1: GOSPEL PROCLAIMING: We proclaim the gospel of our Sovereign Lord and Savior Jesus Christ 2: BIBLE BASED: We submit to the Bible as our final authority in all matters of belief and life 3: LIVE EXPOSITION We promote live, expository preaching to equip the church 4: ELDER LED: We encourage churches to be led by a plurality of male elders/pastors 5: KINGDOM MINDED: We commit to kingdom multiplication through church planting and revitalization
I’m been studying the Orthodox Church, I am not thinking about converting, just studying to have a better understanding of Church History. Why did you leave the Orthodox Church?
Be a Christian, not a protestant, eastern heterodox, or a roman catholic. To be a Christian is to be born again by the incorruptible word of God, and to forsake the wisdom of this world which is foolishness with God. “For it hath been declared unto me of you, my brethren, by them which are of the house of Chloe, that there are contentions among you. Now this I say, that every one of you saith, I am of Paul; and I of Apollos; and I of Cephas; and I of Christ. Is Christ divided? was Paul crucified for you? or were ye baptized in the name of Paul?” 1 Corinthians 1:11-13 “For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which are saved it is the power of God. For it is written, I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and will bring to nothing the understanding of the prudent. Where is the wise? where is the scribe? where is the disputer of this world? hath not God made foolish the wisdom of this world? For after that in the wisdom of God the world by wisdom knew not God, it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe.” 1 Corinthians 1:18-21
As someone who has been thinking of checking out an Orthodox church, this was the answer to my prayers to stay and fight for my Protestant family. Very powerful. And I can't grow a beard. I would not fit in at all.
Good stuff, Dr Ortland. As one who almost swam the Bosphorus 15 years ago, this really spoke to me. Joshua’s three main issues that y’all discussed-ecclesiology, iconology, and Maryology-were the ones that ultimately were roadblocks for me as well, along with the Eastern Orthodox downplaying (if not denial) of penal substitution and imputed righteousness. So I became a traditional Anglican instead.
@@AR-qs2ng it’s all about the state of one’s heart. If one is hard hearted, they will not become Orthodox. It’s not about doctrinal distinctions or logic, or everyone would become Orthodox.
@@MrWesford people don't become " orthodox" because of the errors and unreformable, man glorifying, unscriptural doctrines of those churches. They defend some essential truths, but also beliefs that usurp God's glory and give it to men.
It’s sad to see Joshua paint EO so dishonestly. I’m a Protestant but he is using micro truths to convey macro lies. Giving misinformation is a temptation we must all endure. I pray blessings on them both
This take only has any audience because America is still very Protestant and reformed. Like its European heritage, once it fades and fractures, so too will this divisive, and misunderstood take. What will last is that which has always lasted: Christ’s Church in which he instituted.
I have respect for the Orthodox Church in the way I have respect for the Amish. They represent a snapshot of a way of doing things at a significant point in time, namely the 7th-8th centuries, and they did not fall into the traps of the ages after that period. This gives them great legitimacy and makes them an important resource for navigating the pitfalls of our day. There certainly is a lot that they have held onto which Protestants would be wise to discover. However, this stagnation also makes it nearly impossible for them to retract, repent, reform. I'm not saying they are blind to all of their failures, but I am saying that they've backed themselves into an impasse position when it comes to recognizing the authenticity of the church outside their communion. A person can agree with everything but feel uncomfortable kissing and praying before icons, and that person is anathema according to the 8th council. There are uncountable problems with Protestantism, but the ability to repent and reform are built into the structure. I think this is a positive for Protestantism.
“Repent” is at the heart of orthodoxy. It’s what you will constantly hear! Your point makes me think that you have injected Protestantism and it’s tenets into the EO context. They don’t see a need to reform!! Reform from what? To what? The assumption in your argument is then that Protestantism has found truth that orthodoxy lacks, and that until and unless it “repents” it will stay restricted and stagnate more. Interesting 🤔
@@TheB1nary I believe you've misunderstood my point. I do not see this issue as black and white as you assume I do. I also do not believe protestantism has "found" something which EO hasn't. I was speaking to differences in the structure of the organization. There is a rigidness to the view EO has of itself, not EO people, but the institution. If the institution needed to repent, how could it? If it needed to say, "You know, we realize that we have gone beyond the teaching of the apostles and the fathers, we have narrowed the way beyond the Lord's word, we have gone astray and put boundaries to the church which didn't belong. We have condemned when we should have accepted. We have put unnecessary burdens on the sheep of the Lord's flock." How could they do that without first coming to grips with a possibility that they may have erred in their doctrine, something that only happens on Orthodoxy when 1. A saint opposes the church and is rejected but somehow God vindicated him. Or 2. An ecumenical council votes on it.
@@lucduchien Exactly. The orthodox church teaches that the church cannot err but by doing that they back themselves in the corner. Revelation shows that churches can err and that Jesus can even take their candlesticks. In Timothy, Paul talks about how all the churches in asia separated from him. Protestantism has not just the advantage of admitting error, it also has the advantage of being decentralized. When a protestant church gets liberal or corrupt, the disease can never contaminate all of the other churches. Rome on the other hand is very centralized, all Satan has to do is corrupt the top and it trickles down to the rest. You can see that directly with Pope Francis.
Protestantism tends towards the Spirit of the age(s). Isn't that a worse problem then clinging to tradition? It's allows for the resurgence of old heresies or the birth of new ones, without offering a way through them. Pastors and their flock are left to discern for themselves, not as a body, the will of God.
Pastor Schooping is a great dude. It's so hard to find anyone who came OUT of the high church systems and into Protestantism. Schooping is the first I know of who doesn't stoop to low blows. He just tells the truth, in love and with peace in his heart.
That exclusivity doctrine of Orthodoxy is a non-starter for me. The proof is everywhere. Jesus is working in Iran, Indonesia, and everywhere the persecuted Church exists. People are worshipping Jesus however they can, and some are paying with their lives and never hear about the Orthodox Church.
This is so stupid. Justin Martyr reports he was taught a doctrine of 'deification.' That word isn't even in the protestant vocabulary. Orthodoxy is the only Christian tradition that makes any sense of the records we have of the 2nd Century church.
@@Death2Compromiseexcept that you will not find prayer to saints (not until late 3rd century or 4th century) and you will not find Marian dogma's (again, later in the late 3rd century and beyond). The origin of Marian dogma is found in the protoevangelium of James (late second century). A gnostic writing. That was the very beginning of Mary worship. I'm sorry, but that's what it is: worship. I used to think EO and RC looked like the early church, but that's because I didn't know what the early church looked like until I actually studied it. There are some things in EO that they get right, but Mary worship, prayer to saints (necromancy, really, and veneration of icons (idols) are not some of them.
@@Death2Compromise 2 things: 1. regarding Mary....you really need to read and study the protoevangelium of James. This writing is the first time Mary becomes elevated. It was written by gnostics (probably written by "Tatian" who started the "Encratites" movement) who were trying to disassociate Jesus divine nature from his physical nature. You will see this in how it goes into detail about the virgin birth. Mary stays a virgin after having him (origin of the perpetual virginity). Also, there is no physical birth, a light shines into a cave and when the light goes away, Mary is holding Jesus. A midwife comes and checks "inside" Mary to see if she's still a virgin. She is found to be "intact" inside, meaning no physical birth actually happened. THIS IS STRAIGHT UP HERESY. I promise you if you research this matter, you will see this as the origin of Marian devotion. From gnostics of all places!!!! 2. There's no issue with God's people going from tents (or underground) to gaining more privilege/wealth/political sway etc. That certainly is natural if time allows, over the centuries. The ISSUE is when God's people join hand in hand with the state. God does not desire this for his people. The people of God should never be "ONE* with the state. 1 Samuel 8: ISRAEL ASKS FOR A KING 8 When Samuel grew old, he appointed his sons as Israel’s leaders.[a] 2 The name of his firstborn was Joel and the name of his second was Abijah, and they served at Beersheba. 3 But his sons did not follow his ways. They turned aside after dishonest gain and accepted bribes and perverted justice. 4 So all the elders of Israel gathered together and came to Samuel at Ramah. 5 They said to him, “You are old, and your sons do not follow your ways; now appoint a king to lead[b] us, such as all the other nations have.” 6 But when they said, “Give us a king to lead us,” this displeased Samuel; so he prayed to the Lord. 7 And the Lord told him: “Listen to all that the people are saying to you; it is not you they have rejected, but they have rejected me as their king. 8 As they have done from the day I brought them up out of Egypt until this day, forsaking me and serving other gods, so they are doing to you. 9 Now listen to them; but warn them solemnly and let them know what the king who will reign over them will claim as his rights.” 10 Samuel told all the words of the Lord to the people who were asking him for a king. 11 He said, “This is what the king who will reign over you will claim as his rights: He will take your sons and make them serve with his chariots and horses, and they will run in front of his chariots. 12 Some he will assign to be commanders of thousands and commanders of fifties, and others to plow his ground and reap his harvest, and still others to make weapons of war and equipment for his chariots. 13 He will take your daughters to be perfumers and cooks and bakers. 14 He will take the best of your fields and vineyards and olive groves and give them to his attendants. 15 He will take a tenth of your grain and of your vintage and give it to his officials and attendants. 16 Your male and female servants and the best of your cattle[c] and donkeys he will take for his own use. 17 He will take a tenth of your flocks, and you yourselves will become his slaves. 18 When that day comes, you will cry out for relief from the king you have chosen, but the Lord will not answer you in that day.” 19 But the people refused to listen to Samuel. “No!” they said. “We want a king over us. 20 Then we will be like all the other nations, with a king to lead us and to go out before us and fight our battles.” 21 When Samuel heard all that the people said, he repeated it before the Lord. 22 The Lord answered, “Listen to them and give them a king.” Then Samuel said to the Israelites, “Everyone go back to your own town.”
@@chrisd653 You seem to be ill-informed because the Eastern Orthodox church has NEVER accepted the book of James as a biblical text and they have NEVER accepted it as a dogmatic nor biblically canonical text. It is not part of Eastern orthodox Biblical canon.
@@Death2Compromise I know that. But it still influenced the church and they still base some of their liturgy on it (Mary's entrance into the temple, perpetual virginity etc). It's problematic.
@@Death2Compromise how do you know the text (protoevangelium of James) has some historical significance? If you review all of the ancient writings on Mary, you will find that this is the very first mention of her perpetual virginity, as well as her backstory. It's not just that this document has historical significance, this document is the origin of Marian dogmas. So explain how you know it has historical significance? Let me guess, because your church says so.
This is a very interesting discussion! Thank you both! Coming at this from a protestant perspective, I'm still curious as to what the *problem* with Orthodoxy softening it's veiws on salvation outside the Orthodox church is. Is this not a good thing? It seems fairly consistent to me (as an outsider) that orthodoxy does not require it's saints to be 100% correct, just so long as they are not heretical, much like we protestants treat certain pastors today. & why is it that when the church and state get mixed up, and rebellion against the religious establishment becomes a political issue --why is that a problem with the Church and not with the State? (I know it's both, power corrupts, etc. But. Isn't there a reason the US constitution --the State --lays out that the State should not dabble in official religion vs demanding that Religion have nothing to do with the State? (cf French secularism))
Graven Images in the 10 Commandments were detached from the One True God however, in contrast Icons are not detached from the One True God but rather, relationally directing us to Christ our God and saviour saving work in our lives and in the lives of the saints.
Since I live hundreds of miles from the nearest orthodox church it would be distressing to think that I couldn't be saved outside of the orthodox church.
@DougMiller-ft7wb There's been an increase in converts to EO, myself included. I'm not sure if you're aware, but a lot of EO churches in the U.S. have Liturgy books that have the translations of the hymns
On issue 1. Interesting. My dad was an Orthodox Priest who converted from Anglicanism, and he was very conservative, but believed that while we should fear hell, that the concept of eternal punishment was contrary to God's nature, and that God had a plan for the salvation of everyone. He also believed that while the Eastern Orthodox Church constituted the Church and that salvation was through the Church, that that didn't mean that protestants, or pagans or atheists couldn't go to heaven, just that their salvation was made POSSIBLE by the existence of the True Church whether by the prayers of the Church for those outside the Church, or because the Church is the real doorway to the Kingdom of God and so everyone is going to eventually walk into heaven through the Church, if they do. Also, Orthodoxy does not have the same concept of mortal sins (or a concept of sin at ALL) like the Roman Catholic Church. Sinning is swerving or stumbling off of the path as you carry your cross, and JUSTIFICATION (unlike in the west where it came to mean being made square with the law, or with debt) means being made to stand upright and walk the right path. Justification in Greek means to be straightened out, not to have your debts covered. All Orthodox are absolved after death (except those who committed suicide out of despair for whom we leave it to God, but Jesus gave the Church the power to lose and bind. Unlike Roman Catholicism, Orthodoxy is not capable of making absolute statements that would utterly prevent anyone from passing through purification. I won't speak for the Church here, except to say that the Church is somewhat mute on the mystery. Keep in mind that we believe that salvation is the path, not the destination, and so salvation is the process of trying every day to walk the path of God's will, and Baptism or initiation is clearly not required as we are taught by the Good Thief, as well as the 40th Martyr of Sebaste. I will take the time to watch both of these videos though, I haven't had a chance to watch all of each one yet.
I read the NT and I don't see hesychasm, I don't see energies, I don't see icons, I don't see the liturgy (which has changed again and again), I don't see deification (as opposed to sanctification), I don't see national churches. But I do see substitutionary atonement. And I do see that EO's ignore the councils that they are embarrassed by. Thank you, Pastor Schooping, for your book.
@@hippios Time after time Jesus said "Have you not read ...?" He held people accountable for what is written and had a higher view of scripture than you do. See John 17:17.
Your argument holds absolutely zero weight because scripture is NOT all there is in Christianity… almost as if Paul spent months and years teaching Christianity and traditions orally… thinking he Only taught what was in his short epistles over the course of years with these places is ridiculous. You’re making a claim absolutely no Christians believed for 1600 years.
@9:21 I find the tone deafness staggering. Just for context, you have two protestants complaining about the exclusivity of the Orthodox church. Why are they tone deaf? They're complaining that the Orthodox Church says that there is no salvation outside of the Church. How is that relevant? Because Christ _is_ exclusive. _I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me_ John 14:6 You can't be a Buddhist monk and end up accidentally saved, because "all religions are basically the same." No! Either Jesus is God, or isn't. He either established his Church through apostles or he didn't. He either meant it when he said that gates of hell will not prevail against it, or he didn't. There are no two ways about it. So, *_if_* Jesus is God and he established his Church and it is the Orthodox Church, then they have the authority to say that they are exclusive way to Christ. You're free to complain about it, invent new religion or add more palatable addons to Christianity to make it more in your image and liking. But to say that you don't like his Church because it is exclusive, while also proclaiming your belief in "the word of God", is just staggering tone deafness. If the Orthodox church isn't the one Jesus established, who cares what they say? If they are, who are you to demand them to fit to your taste?
@14:29 *_Obeying the scriptures is just what we're required to do."_* No! You're using your invention and newfound belief that Protestantism is true to conclude what Jesus must have meant, *despite* no early church sharing your view. You're following your own desires, not what the church that Jesus left us teaches. If both the early churches- the Orthodox and the Catholic agree on something, that alone should give you a long long long pause in thinking- am I conforming to truth, or am I conforming truth to my own will?
It's just sad listening forward. The confusion that multitude of lies we are presented with in no way diminishes the truth. The fact that many people claim to be Christian should not surprise us. Devil is the father of lies. If he didn't lie we could easily conclude that Christianity is false. Truth is one. Path to truth is one. Your fruit argument has merit as it is both true and obvious from everyday life- the closer we are to the truth- the better it is for us. Everything else is false and will end up destroying us. _Enter through the narrow gate; for the gate is wide and the way is broad that leads to destruction, and there are many who enter through it. For the gate is small and the way is narrow that leads to life, and there are few who find it._ Matthew 7:13-14
@@PetarStamenkovic As a Catholic, I think this all the time. If gives me great comfort that the historic apostolic churches, despite their schisms, share so much in belief and practice.
He addressed the fact that he’s not advocating for religious pluralism. Christ established a church, that is people who believed that he was the Messiah and those who trusted in his promises. The EO to claim that their church as in institution is the only way to Christ just doesn’t have that much backing. He also addresses Matthew 7 that those true followers of Christ you will be able to recognize their good fruits. There is no way the Orthodox church can claim that they have all the good fruits and no other churches do. It’s indisputable the ways in which Protestant/RC churches have greatly impacted the world and had good fruit. To be fair you could potentially make the opposite claim about EO, especially in countries that the state religion, with the way it has tended blend with facist regimes in the 19th/20th century. Just an example.
It is also disingenuous for Joshua Schooping to talk about the ecclesiology of the Orthodox Church as it was formed after the time of Constantine, when it was stated most clearly by St. Cyprian of Carthage in his Treatise on the Unity of the Church, and he was martyred in 258 a.d. I have discussed this with Joshua before, and so he is certainly aware of this fact.
Toward the end of the interview St. Cyprian is mentioned only to dismiss what he most certainly taught. And it is not true that the only schismatics or heretics St. Cyprian had to contend with were rigorists. There were also those who were far more lenient. What St. Cyprian focuses on is what the Church is, and that it is one and visible. You could also go back to St. Ignatius of Antioch, a disciple of the Apostle John. He says no one who follows another into a schism will inherit the kingdom of God. He clearly sees the church as one and visible.
I’ve been SO lost in the theological weeds lately, I was on orthodoxies door due to their string claims of history and tradition. I was twisting and contorting all that I’ve ever known of the gospel to fit the ideas of the Orthodoxy. I was crying and having panic attacks nearly every day out of fear that I’d end up in the wrong church… Several people from the Orthodox Church were really pressing me to join with incredibly compelling evidence, but no matter how convinced I was, there was no peace in that conviction, only terror, fear, something almost evil about making that shift. Thank God Almighty, that I got to speak with Joshua last night about this very issue… he took the time, nearly an hour to calm me down, and reveal the flaws in my logic. I broke down and sobbed tears of relief afterwards. I finally felt the demons leave me… I felt God again… Praise God
@@thegearhouse5337 don’t let this person bother you. I’m sorry you went through what you did. Praise God for guiding you to His truth which is found in His Word and His Holy Spirit Who lives in you!
Can’t wait for this video! I have looked into EO before but had some serious issues with its claim of exclusivity and doctrines. I know some (not all) online orthodox can be very vitriolic about criticisms so thank you for putting this out and blessing them regardless!
Same, I started out by diving into more eastern church fathers. But what really drew me in and made me interested in was people like father spyrem priest who always produced this sense of practical spiritual wisdom that you feel is more about Christian living and less about dogmatic theology
I have looked into Christianity before but had some serious issues with its claim of exclusivity and doctrines. I know some (not all) online Christians can be very vitriolic about criticisms so thank you for putting this out and blessing them regardless!
@@jasona.4846 I get what you’re trying to get at with this, but I think there is a difference between saying only those who call upon the name of Christ will be saved and only Christians who are in one specific institution are saved and all others, regardless of their true faith in Christ and their trusting upon his name and work for salvation, are damned.
@Bb Dl Deeply, deeply ignorant statement. I'm on mobile so I won't look back over: here's a starting point: learn the definition of "katholikos", or "Catholic". It does not refer to the papacy, or an institution, or a denomination, at any time that any church Father references it because *the papacy, and denominations did not exist until 1054* and the patristic period was by anyone's estimation, ended well before that. This invalidates your entire, ignorant statement.
Throughout human history, the search for God has presented itself as a journey with two main paths: mystical experience and intellectual reasoning. Eastern Orthodoxy, rooted in the early Church, leans towards mystical experience, valuing prayer and contemplation as pathways to feeling the divine presence. Conversely, Western Christianity, influenced by figures like Thomas Aquinas and John Calvin, focuses on reason and academic study, seeking an intellectual understanding of God. This divergence has resulted in a rich theological diversity, where Eastern Orthodoxy considers true theology to emerge from the lived experience of God, while Western Christianity views it as an intellectual exercise. The phrase 'The theologian is the one who prays' encapsulates the Orthodox belief that theology is a spiritual journey that leads to the divine mystery. This distinction highlights the core difference in understanding the nature of God and the relationship between faith and reason, shaping the development of theological thought and practice within each tradition. While both paths seek to comprehend the divine, the Eastern emphasis on mystical experience underscores the importance of personal encounter with the divine, while the Western focus on intellectual reasoning prioritizes a rational understanding of God's nature and attributes.
Im ery impressed with this gentleman, I wish I had and responded more with the same kind, humble and gentle attitude he has towards those that persecute and attack him (same with Dr. Ortlund).
Maybe this is why I always felt so unwelcome in traditional orthodox churches. "Lifeless" is a word I would use to describe these places. Maybe it's because the icons are indeed dead.i was told they were a window into the unseen world. Now I know which world.
Hades [As used in Luke 16:23] ᾅδῃ (hadē) Noun - Dative Masculine Singular Strong's 86: Hades, the unseen world. Properly, unseen, i.e. 'Hades' or the place of departed souls.
Or because you’re spiritually weak. And I don’t mean that in a mean way but have you even considered you don’t like the house of God because you are spiritual unwell and push Hod away?
Thankyou men for the clarity! Church history is so interesting. In one of our local Greek Orthodox churches, the Sunday school teachers are required to bow down and kiss the regional bishops ring upon his arrival.
1. The orthobros have changed many things in the past, while pretending they haven't 2. They also want to keep pretending they haven't changed anything, so in the era of cellphones they're apprehensive to fix any of their obvious problems. No contradiction, if you think for 2 seconds. I know you're used to your "fathers" doing that for you, but you can do it, I promise.
His top issue is that the Orthodox church is exclusivistic on salvation? Which he says is cultic? Christianity at large is exclusivistic in savlation. Will he leave Christianity now too? These aren't well formed thoughts.
Any the beginning he clearly says that Christianity is exclusive. Problem is, the Eastern Orthodox anathematize anyone who is not orthodox. We could agree on Christiology, soteriology, sacramentology, etc. but because I am not orthodox many would say I am not truly in Christ.
@@arnoldvezbon6131 I don’t need a counter argument to idol worship except God rejects it in exodus 20. Orthodox took pictures for education and required it in worship . That’s insane. LOOK just be honest and get a golden calf and use it . Your icons are nothing like the description of Eternal Jesus and why it doesn’t bother you is a mystery. Again I don’t care what you think about it I’m fine with you doing whatever but Orthodox go to far forcing me to do it so I am out . That and your insistence on exclusivity is why your a Christian sect . Who will always remain small
@@dallasbrat81 You are arguing with a straw man of your own creation. You clearly have no understanding of iconography yet are very confidant in your ignorance. Icons are not Idols and are not worshiped in the Orthodox Church. Why is this so hard to understand for you? Your anyone with a bible can interpret scripture is why you are now including the rainbow flag in your churches (an idol of pride). So maybe humble yourself son.
More like a protestant revert. He never really fully embraced Orthodox teaching at all, was trying to argue that Penal Substitutionary Atonement was Orthodox teaching after he was ordained as a priest.
@@adrummingdog2782 you'll always be hard pressed to show True Light to those that can't comprehend the struggles of darkness. This man was a western materialist with spiritual problems who entered the Church and never healed those preexisting issues. So he reverted back
One out of twelve betrayed Lord even though he was facing Lord and saw or heard directly about the all miracles He performed... so no wonder in our days there will exist same kind of people who turn their back on the Lord and His Church.... there is nothing anew under the sun.
57:30 this is such a good point. When researching a denomination I've started looking not for testimonies of new converts, but for testimonies of people who left that denomination. Popular advocates for a Christian denomination as well as new converts tend to paint a very skewed picture of their flavour of Christianity.
Ex Orthodox here also. When I started reading the scriptures decades ago I realized that a lot of teachings in the Orthodox Church were not scriptural. Praise God for opening my eyes to see His Truth.
@jesusalva33 I'm Greek from Australia, I was born into Orthodoxy. I left it in my late teens after reading the scriptures & have never looked back since. My faith and trust is not in a church or a religious institution of any kind, but in Christ Jesus and His Word.
@@jairoquintanilla9357 When you spend enough time in the scriptures and study very early church history, you begin to realize that the Orthodox & Catholic churches had over time developed new dogmas and teachings that were never their early on and were contrary to the Scriptures.
As a recent convert from Orthodoxy (ROCOR, same as Pastor Josh!) to Reformed Evangelicalism, I can appreciate a lot of what is being said about the concerns of exclusivist theology found in Orthodoxy, along with some alarming practices and beliefs that simply cannot be espoused when honestly reading Scripture. There is much beauty and truth in Orthodoxy, but it cannot supersede the miracle which is salvation by Grace, the imputed righteousness of Christ - who vanquished death by His death on the Cross - on us, and the holy joy of the Bible.
What is church under the Reformed Evangelical system? I am seeking a nondenominational type of church that is truly bible based. I am really praying on this, very disillusioned by the Eastern Orthodox Church and its teachings and theology. I appreciate any insight.
C’est terriblement enragent de voir les Réformés ne pas comprendre ce qu’ils lisent dans la Bible! En particulier la virginité de Marie et les « frères « de Jesus! Une vidéo leur serait utile pour bien comprendre la Bible, par exemple sur ce 😢sujet, par le père Menas, prêtre orthodoxe en Martinique.
@@tigger55100most non-denom churches are just Baptist. I'm biased, but I'd look into confessional Lutheran churches if I were you. Real Presence, baptismal regeneration, deep history and theology. And all about the joy of the Gospel!
Orthodoxy has a cosmic and maximalist view of salvation, not a juridical one, as in Protestantism. Salvation involves Christ becoming incarnate in every true believer, not just Mary. Also, Mary is the source of Jesus humanity, which is undivided from his divinity (in that way, "to Jesus through Mary" isn't inappropriate, especially given the rejection of Nestorianism). Orthodox language of devotion is not meant to be precise, and it's unfair to judge the language of devotion using the standards of Western logic, since Orthodoxy itself rejects those standards. Lutherans historically criticize Catholic Mariology for entirely different reasons from the Reformed, BTW. Luther criticized the practice because he basically takes a quasi-Quietist view that the saints already pray for us, and that to invoke the saints is a kind of "work" that is unnecessary (he has a juridical view of salvation, as did many Catholics of his time period, but he takes it to a minimalist degree). Madame Margaret Guenon, the 17th century Catholic mystic, had a similar attitude - she didn't consider the petition of saints to be idolatry, she just believed in her mystical union with God ,she had fellowship with them already and her prayers were united with them. It's less about thinking the practice is idolatrous in both cases (Luther and Guenon), and more about having a desire for practical minimalism, esp. given the juridical nature of Roman Catholic religious thought at the time.
As a seeker who stumbled into an Orthodox parish and brotherhood recently, I have found this discussion quite helpful. I fell away from Protestantism when I was a teen because of how empty the experience had been and how inadequate were the answers and guidance I received, so facing these types of questions head-on is an essential exercise -- giving them a free pass would be a recipe for disaster.
@@JosefFurg1611 I was looking into it as an inquirer. They wanted me to become a catechumen and stop asking questions. Accidentally got my brother into their cult before deciding I didn't like having their egregore in my head. I still drop in for social events periodically since I'm fond of the people (though haven't in a while due to a recent and severe illness), but I do not attend their liturgies and other psychic programming events.
Actually he has no idea about orthodox church theology he is talking in reality about the administration and suposed base his knowledge that orthodox Theology is about that
@@ΓραικοςΕλληνας Schooping has some understanding of Orthodox theology; he has published books on Orthodox spirituality which were praised by many in the Orthodox world.
@@j.athanasius9832 you dont learn about orthodox church theology from books actually that is a western way based on scholastic theologian methodologies actually it is a wrong way. Sure a book can help but it is not the best way. In reality any type of philosophy analogia entis or analogia fidei that protestants use cant reality give any union or knowledge for the DEITY.
I keep waiting for the big bombshell objection which hadn't occurred to me before that might make me question my Orthodoxy, but these are all pretty tepid, standard Prot objections. How did he even manage to become an EO priest in the first place?
I was wondering the same thing. I can’t imagine him being an Orthodox priest. The majority of his points are the same points I had against Protestantism when becoming Orthodox.
Agreed. I’m open to challenging my beliefs and all, but I can’t help but come away from this video thinking that all of the objections raised here were particularly weak. All we can do is pray for him, and hope that he reconsiders. Thankfully, he seems charitable enough, but it’s all in Christ’s hands now. Lord have mercy! ☦️
sigh... combing through history (peoples' behaviour) to find out if you're part of the true church... what a mess! Just look in the Bible and believe it. If your church obeys it without explaining away central things in it (like how God alone is to be worshiped, Jesus is God and has resurrected, Jesus is the ONLY mediator and saviour, no worship/prayer to some other person other than God is allowed) then you are in the true faith. Those who do what Jesus told us to do are the followers of Jesus/God! Who cares what some random religious person from 1000 yrs ago did and what ripple effect that had on society? Society is not God. Politics is not God. Church history is not God. God told us what he wants: It's in the BIBLE! ("The anxiety of exclusivism" chapter inspired me to write this.)
A bunch of bologna, that is an un-honest representation of the Eastern Orthodox worldview. Do not LIE about us and disagree with us over those made up lies. Instead tell the truth about us and disagree with the truth, wth this guy sucks for misrepresenting our views. I wish he got our views accurate then disagreed with that, at least I would understand better, but watching this is so upsetting because his inaccurate depiction of our faith
I was very confused for awhile whether I should leave the Baptist Church for Orthodoxy because they claimed apostolic succession from before the schism of 1054 Thank you Mr Ortlund
Many of the EOs I know act like a cult, when presented with church fathers that disagree with them, they dodge, start personal insults, change the topic, talk about meta conversation, try to twist what the church father is saying. I dont feel like my concerns are addressed, only rhetoric provided
Why even call ourselves ‘Protestants’? We are not serving the reformers, only Christ our master. We should be called Christians after the name which is above all names, and we are to hold fast the holy scriptures; the revelation of God almighty to the prophets and apostles, not any other confession, any other tradition, or any other sectarian allegiance. “For ye are yet carnal: for whereas there is among you envying, and strife, and divisions, are ye not carnal, and walk as men? For while one saith, I am of Paul; and another, I am of Apollos; are ye not carnal? Who then is Paul, and who is Apollos, but ministers by whom ye believed, even as the Lord gave to every man?” 1 Corinthians 3:3-5 “Therefore let no man glory in men. For all things are yours; Whether Paul, or Apollos, or Cephas, or the world, or life, or death, or things present, or things to come; all are yours; And ye are Christ's; and Christ is God's.” 1 Corinthians 3:21-23
"Why even call ourselves ‘Protestants’? We are not serving the reformers, only Christ our master. We should be called Christians..." This is an understandable sentiment, but "Protestant" is a useful term for communication and not a sign that we are serving the early reformers. To call ourselves Protestant is a shorthand way of explaining why, with everything we have in common with the Roman Catholic Church, we are not still in communion with them. In essence, we are Christians who "protest" what we perceive as serious deviations from Scripture's teaching. A world where the term "Christian" by itself would communicate all that needed communicating would be a nice one, but sadly, this is not the world we live in. Say I meet someone who claims to be a Christian. In reality, that tells me very little about what they believe and the "Christ" they worship. Are they one of the "Christians" who worship the Jesus who is the Son of God? Or do they worship the Jesus who is a created being and spirit-brother of the devil? Do they worship the second person of the Trinity, or do they worship Michael the Archangel? Even among those who would claim the name Protestant, there are differences significant enough to require further clarification. Imagine two people from the same neighborhood say to you "I am a Protestant Christian." Yet you wonder why they attend different Churches, since they live so close together. Well, one is a Baptist and the other a Lutheran. Both are rightly categorized as Christian. Both are rightly categorized as Protestant. But to understand either of them properly, you need a third term tacked on. Now, our Catholic and Orthodox friends might look at us and say "well, that lack of clarity is all the Protestant's fault. They're schismatic by nature so it's no surprise that they need extra questions to parse out the differences between all those who claim Christianity." But let's not forget that they also suffer from the same problem. They both claim to be Christian, yet have anathematized the other and each have given rise to their own sects, variations, and theological off-shoots. In other words, as much as we might want to piously claim the name "Christian" for ourselves and eschew all other nomenclature, such linguistic "purity" would not allow us to communicate effectively with the outside world.
@@gardyloogubbins There is not ambiguity. A Christian is one who follows Jesus Christ our Lord as purely and perfectly as he is testified of by the prophets and apostles. A Christian follows all 66 books of holy scripture. If we follow all 66 books of holy scripture then it concludes that we are forbidden from heaping onto it the traditions of men, first of all because holy scripture is pure and perfect, so it does not lack anything nor require impure or imperfect words to be added to it, and additionally it can be clearly shown from the words of our Lord that the action of teaching for doctrines the precepts, commandments, or traditions of men is an action which invalidates worship. The revelation of scripture and the binding of doctrine ceased in the generation of the apostles. Now, there cannot be dispute among the faithful servants, about the fact that the Lord Jesus the Christ is the first and the last, besides whom there is no other God. And if a man does not believe this then he rejects Christ and the entirety of what is revealed and he cannot be called a Christian. If you call yourself a Protestant, Lutheran, a Methodist, et cetera, a Catholic, or an Eastern “orthodox”, then you are calling yourself by names which the apostles never knew nor called themselves, rather the believers were first called Christians at Antioch. And you wish to call yourself a Protestant, as you say, because of the world that you live in, then know that those who are in Christ are seated together with him in heavenly places. And the wisdom of this world is foolishness with God. Love not the world nor the things that are in it. The body is of Christ, and there is to be oneness of mind, without division; for variance and heresies are carnality, in which it is impossible to please God. Christ is returning for that church without spot or blemish; a peculiar people, purified and zealous over good works. The lukewarm he will spew out of his mouth. Whosoever is astray is astray. The sheep hear the voice of Christ and they will not listen to a stranger. And there is no other name under heaven by which a man must be saved except the name which is above all names: the name of Jesus Christ. Many are called, few are chosen.
Be as a noble berean and hear the word of the Lord, then you can determine whether or not I am preaching rightly: “Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me. And ye will not come to me, that ye might have life. I receive not honour from men. But I know you, that ye have not the love of God in you. I am come in my Father's name, and ye receive me not: if another shall come in his own name, him ye will receive. How can ye believe, which receive honour one of another, and seek not the honour that cometh from God only?” John 9:35-44 “If ye love me, keep my commandments.” John 14:15 “And hereby we do know that we know him, if we keep his commandments. He that saith, I know him, and keepeth not his commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him. But whoso keepeth his word, in him verily is the love of God perfected: hereby know we that we are in him.” 1 John 2:3-5 “This people draweth nigh unto me with their mouth, and honoureth me with their lips; but their heart is far from me. But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.” Matthew 15:8-9 “But unto you I say, and unto the rest in Thyatira, as many as have not this doctrine, and which have not known the depths of Satan, as they speak; I will put upon you none other burden. But that which ye have already hold fast till I come.” Revelation 2:24-25 “I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end, the first and the last. Blessed are they that do his commandments, that they may have right to the tree of life, and may enter in through the gates into the city. For without are dogs, and sorcerers, and whoremongers, and murderers, and idolaters, and whosoever loveth and maketh a lie. I Jesus have sent mine angel to testify unto you these things in the churches. I am the root and the offspring of David, and the bright and morning star.” Revelation 22:13-16 “Thus saith the LORD the King of Israel, and his redeemer the LORD of hosts; I am the first, and I am the last; and beside me there is no God.” Isaiah 44:6 “Ye are my witnesses, saith the LORD, and my servant whom I have chosen: that ye may know and believe me, and understand that I am he: before me there was no God formed, neither shall there be after me. I, even I, am the LORD; and beside me there is no saviour.” Isaiah 43:10-11 “For the grace of God that bringeth salvation hath appeared to all men, Teaching us that, denying ungodliness and worldly lusts, we should live soberly, righteously, and godly, in this present world; Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ; Who gave himself for us, that he might redeem us from all iniquity, and purify unto himself a peculiar people, zealous of good works. These things speak, and exhort, and rebuke with all authority. Let no man despise thee.” Titus 2:11-15 “And when he had found him, he brought him unto Antioch. And it came to pass, that a whole year they assembled themselves with the church, and taught much people. And the disciples were called Christians first in Antioch.” Acts 11:26
“Wherefore if ye be dead with Christ from the rudiments of the world, why, as though living in the world, are ye subject to ordinances, (Touch not; taste not; handle not; Which all are to perish with the using;) after the commandments and doctrines of men?” Colossians 2:22-22 “And hath raised us up together, and made us sit together in heavenly places in Christ Jesus:” Ephesians 2:6 “For the wisdom of this world is foolishness with God. For it is written, He taketh the wise in their own craftiness. And again, The Lord knoweth the thoughts of the wise, that they are vain. Therefore let no man glory in men.” 1 Corinthians 3:19-21 “Finally, be ye all of one mind, having compassion one of another, love as brethren, be pitiful, be courteous:” 1 Peter 3:8 “Now I beseech you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye all speak the same thing, and that there be no divisions among you; but that ye be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment.” 1 Corinthians 1:10 “Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these; Adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness, Idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies,” Galatians 5:19-20 “So then they that are in the flesh cannot please God.” Romans 8:8 “I know thy works, that thou art neither cold nor hot: I would thou wert cold or hot. So then because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will spue thee out of my mouth.” Revelation 3:15-16 “Be it known unto you all, and to all the people of Israel, that by the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom ye crucified, whom God raised from the dead, even by him doth this man stand here before you whole. This is the stone which was set at nought of you builders, which is become the head of the corner. Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved.” Acts 4:10-12 “Wherefore God also hath highly exalted him, and given him a name which is above every name: That at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth; And that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.” Philippians 2:9-11 “And when he putteth forth his own sheep, he goeth before them, and the sheep follow him: for they know his voice. And a stranger will they not follow, but will flee from him: for they know not the voice of strangers.” John 10:4-5 “For many are called, but few are chosen.” Matthew 22:14
Pastor, I submit that you are very much an intellectual, being more in your mind than your heart. Like many “educated” Orthodox in the west you are living through the carnal mind and not through the heart purified by divine grace. I have been to school many years as well and have been down that road of Catholicism, Protestantism, and evangelicalism and have experienced it as but carnal dross in contrast to the living word that is the heart of Orthodoxy.
Which canons in the Orthodox Church claim that all outside the church are damned? All I can find are recent quotations of people saying that that is not the case. I'm trying to debate w/ a friend and would like to use primary sources.
Comparing the Orthodox position to the Novationists is absolute insanity and shows that Schooping never had any idea what he believed in the first place - shame on whoever ordained him.
The ex-priest is wrong. The Orthodox view is that we know where the Holy Spirit is, but not where He is not. We don't believe anyone outside the church will go to Hell, but they are allowing themselves to be exposed to much confusion. We have the -fullness- of truth.
35:27 If there were a change as important as a change in the 10 Commandments there would be something mentioned in the New Testament and there is regarding the Sabbath. Rom.14 and Col.2 make it clear that the Sabbath law is no longer binding.
