KingdomCraft: Are Catholics Christian? 

While it's a ridiculous thing to say, I think it comes not so much from hostility but from ignorance of terminology. Since Protestants are the majority Christians in the US, and since US Protestants usually just call themselves "Christians" by default (and may not even know the term "Protestant") they may make this ignorant, yet understandable, mistake upon encountering a Catholic (who do not call themselves "Christian" by default).

​​@@WildCard-ze3tmAt this point, I think evangelical churches in America are just using a "papal scare" as their new ploy after the prosperity gospel was pretty much ousted as a scam. The amount of evangelicals from the US who claim to "have gone to catholic school" to justify their disdain of catholicism is just ridiculous.

They're not wrong.

​@@MetaKnight964💀 Catholics where founded by Jesus Christ. Also we're the first church.

@@MetaKnight964Seethe Proddie lmao

Yeah for sure you can really see it in Latin America where I come from with all these different priests so far away from actual Rome that practice heresies and actually care more about Mary and the Saints than actual God and that's a mistake many make where they're more accustomed to the stories of the Saints than god

What type of school is that? How can I learn of the tradition

It’s close to finished in my most recent videos!

@@redeemedzoomer6053 Awesome I'll have to check them out!

Yea

@@redeemedzoomer6053 Nice! /)

​@@redeemedzoomer6053 is the server accessable to bedrock and what's the code

thirst comes about by lack, not abundance.

@@svrsl7819 No it comes in recognition that it is what you need

​@@svrsl7819 This sounds like cope to me.

@@TheMacDonald22 i'm glad fanatically following a system of doctrinal eisegesis doesn't sound like cope to you.

@@svrsl7819 blessed are those who hunger and thirst for righteousness :) And who recognise that we are poor in spirit.

Based

@@tiagoviana5161 no you are based

I'm Brazilian

@@PeoplesRepublicNewSilesia Based também

Based

Yeah exactly, especially for example the fact that many Eastern Churches came back to communion with Rome and Rome with them in the wake of the reformation.

What? No the protestant revolution was inmensely harmful to Christianity. Europe almost lost part of its territory to Islam because of the protestant revolution.

Bruh, Rome literally denies the gospel.

@@florida8953 don't say random statements you can't prove. Especially putting 'bruh' before them, it makes it worse for you

​@@florida8953Did you even watch the video? Redeemed Zoomer explained how Catholics do NOT deny the gospel. The Catholic Church believes Salvation by faith

Same, be careful tho this dude is still Protestant

Why say traditional catholic? Why not just say catholic? There’s no need to draw unnecessary divisions in the true and holy church. You are either Catholic or not. Simple as that.

@@elyuko293 because, there is a big difference between the Tridentine mass of the ages and the Vatican II mass

Many Catholics have fallen into the errors of the modernist heresy. Traditional Catholic is just a way of showing you’re doing your best to follow the Catholic faith as it has been practiced for thousands of years.

@@apathyapathy8765yeah this guy is generally super knowledgeable and good for learning but there are areas where his Protestant tendencies come through

they have no idea what they're talking about 😂

I'm a SBC inspired non-denominational and I absolutely consider Catholics my brothers and sisters in Christ.

Same here I was raised in a Pentecostal church where we were taught Catholics were idol worshippers and satanists. Now, I am still Protestant, a Lutheran, but I have a great respect for Catholics and Orthodox Christians. God bless!

Same, I always define myself that way to avoid the confusion and to fight the cultural tendency of the Catholic Christians (and the Orthodox do it too) to just call themselves by their denomination. I would even much rather skip that and only bring up the Christian part tbh

What does Jewish Christian mean?

@@nohomo4774 He is a Jew (Judaism) who came to faith in Jesus Christ as the Messiah.

​@@nohomo4774"You're Jewish because your mom is Jewish, but Christian" Basically

I would guess someone who is of Jewish descent that is a member of the Christian faith.

Messianic Jew?

Purgatory is pretty much the mandatory work on oneself a saved member of the KKK would have to do to get along with any black person in heaven. Its not about saving yourself, its about letting God work you out so that you may be in full communion with each other (and God).

@@olivierdomingue6312 Right. Put simply, it is the completion of a saved person's sanctification, since "nothing unclean can enter" Heaven.

@@olivierdomingue6312 its unlikly that any members of the KKK are in purgatory or Heaven considering the fact that the lynched blacks, Catholics, and Republicans

@@jdotoz but are we not made clean by Jesus' blood? We can never be perfect on our own, which is why Jesus died so we can reconciled to the Father. If that is true, we would have no need for purification after death, because we are already reconciled to the Father through the sacrifice of the Son.

@@Veilwing Do you, right now, feel ready to live in the presence of God? Remember, *nothing unclean* can enter the City.

true. Works without faith and Faith without works are both dead

I was very perplexed that he never even talked about this

The works, or better saying, what they signify, the Love for God, are what makes the faith to be alive. Not only are works said to manifest faith but they are also said to make it alive just like the soul causes the body to be alive.

@@igorlopes7589 Opposite. The works are an expression of faith. Faith without works is dead, because works justify (evidence) the faith one has. Faith will naturally produce works, not the other way around.

@@liquidboss2719 St James not only says works manifest faith, but that they also make faith to be complete and alive, in the same way the soul makes the body to be alive. "As the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without deeds is dead" "In the same way, faith by itself, if it is not accompanied by action, is dead"

That's not what he was saying. Does the spirit keep the body alive, or does the body make the spirit live? @@igorlopes7589

Take off that name. Christianity is not Islam. Jesus Christ is not a cosmic slaver like Allah who demands everyone to be his subject.

_The problem with faith alone is the book of James_ The problem with faith + works is the book of Galatians. And whether one believes Paul and James believe two different things about the Gospel or they're in agreement. If catholicism is true then Paul was out of line for calling the Galatians out for trying to be further justified before God by adding on works to their faith which is what modern day Roman Catholics do. In essence the argument is based on how does one have peace with God, and being in Roman Catholicism, there's no real guarantee of that peace given that at any given time you could die in a state of mortal sin and go straight to hell if you don't get to a priest and do confession in time. _Who is the fool in verse 20_ The person who says they are justified by faith but their life doesn't reflect repentance and love for God. Verse 22 says, "You see that faith was active along with his works, and faith was completed by his works" The faith being talked about here is Abraham's faith and his works, offering his son on the altar, if you go back to Genesis you'll find that story takes place in Genesis 22, Abraham was justified by faith way before he even had Isaac in Genesis 15:6, ie through his faith in God and it was counted to him as righteousness.

@@choicemeatrandy6572 Good reply. The problem I see with faith alone is value. If it is faith alone, then it should have sufficient value without anything else. This is why the Bible doesn’t have the word “alone” in the same verses as faith. Adding “alone” changes the meaning of what the text is saying about faith. If faith is worthless without works, faith cannot have sufficient value alone to justify us. You touched on Abraham and you voiced truth, his faith is as the Bible says. But that faith was worthless without works in that God tested him as you correctly mentioned by God commanding him to sacrifice his son. If faith alone, we would not have God testing him. Faith alone effectively would say the test isn’t needed because Abraham should have known his faith was all that was needed. But no, Abraham needed his faith tested this way. The works are a need for us, not God. Works are what make us a lighthouse to the world. The song, “By our love will they know us” is our works telling the world we are Christian. Pope Francis talked about the difference in the Catholic and Protestant beliefs and it was similar to a thought I had years ago: The beliefs are actually similar and not that big of a deal. Imagine the two beliefs as a road. We have the same starting point, faith. We diverge onto different roads called works. We say faith and works. Protestant’s road is faith alone but they still have good teachings on works outside linking works with faith. The end results in justification and righteousness. We start and finish in the same place. We both believe in faith and the value of works in one way or another. The other similarity is we both use Scripture to back up our beliefs. A Protestant will say this or that about faith and Catholicism agrees. We agree on faith and I think Protestants should think about that before condemning us. This is where Mark 9:39 comes to play. We can either say the other is going to hell or we can listen to Mark 9:39 and see our similarities. Thank you for your respectful reply. That is to me what being Christian is. Obeying Jesus by loving each other and showing thoughtful respect. This is what Catholicism put into Vatican 2 so maybe one day the divisions one day may end. Paul spoke of the need for the church to be united. Catholicism values that.

@@paulmualdeave5063 Thank you for the respectful and cogent response. While I agree with some of the things you said, I still find that the differences we have are irreconcilable. I don't believe we are taking the same road that will lead to the same place, I believe that if you've got the Gospel wrong, just as Paul said in Galatians, then you've fallen from grace and Christ is of no benefit to you. You said, "If faith alone then we would not have God testing him" but this simply isn't true. The test wasn't for God to find out whether Abraham was justified or not, God is all-knowing, the test was for Abraham to see for himself that his faith in God was legitimate by offering up the person he loved the most, his faith (the one from Genesis 15:6) had produced fruit. And his justification, as the Scriptures say, happened when he first believed in God and it was counted to him as righteousness. The works accompanied that faith as it says in Galatians 5:6...

@@choicemeatrandy6572 Yes, I also said unless I typed it wrong that the benefit of Abraham’s works was to him as God didn’t need it. What you are not seeing is Protestantism does factor in works as beneficial, it just doesn’t link it to faith in Sola Fide. Lets take likely what is your Ten Commandments. The 2nd is the restriction against idols. Catholicism defines idols largely as we see in Rachel’s story in Genesis when her father called them his “gods”. The First Commandment is thou shall not have any gods but God. Her father violated the First Commandment. And that is where Catholicism has placed the restriction against idols, in the 1st Commandment. We both have a restriction against idols, we just put them in different places. Both of us have works, we just put them in different places. Earth is really just a testing ground. Our lives are built around whether or not we will sacrifice our favorite thing like a son or not. You can say we are wrong and we can say you are wrong. To me, I love what Clint Eastwood says in The Outlaw Josie Wells to his American Indians neighbors. Basically we can live together in peace or butcher each other and he believed men can live together and not butcher each other. Thus Jesus gave us Mark 9:38-40 and told us to love our enemies. People saying others will go to hell doesn’t help anyone. It isn’t love. Only Jesus can decide who goes. Galatians 5:6 -Catholicism agrees. The example of circumcision or uncircumcision is irrelevant in Christianity because these are examples of what would be a “work of the law”. Protestantism I have found confuses works and works of the law. The Bible talks of all sorts of works, works of the law, good works and bad works. The restriction against works is actually just a restriction against works of the law, which we find a list throughout the Old Testament. Ive heard the Jews had over 300 or 400 of these laws. One example is circumcision and this issue was resolved in Acts with the Council of Jerusalem, which is the basis for Catholics having Councils like the Councils of Carthage and Trent and Vatican 1 and Vatican 2. We use them to resolve debates and disputes like the disputes on circumcision. Faith without works is linked to good works, not works of the law. Verse 5 says people felt justified by the law and this is against what Jesus taught. It says in verse 5 that justification by the law/works of the law has no value. Now go to James 2:20 -24. It says Foolish person, do you need proof that faith without works is worthless (Gal 6 “no value”). We now have two things of no value. Works of the law and faith without works. It then ends with “We are justified by works and not faith alone.” All of this to me shows that the formula is faith and works. Sola Fide is justification by faith alone, yet James 2:24 says this is false. The fool in James 2:20 is the person that believes in Sola Fide? Faith is shown to me insufficient alone to save or justify us. If faith alone saves us, then we get into Baptism saving us, which is how Catholicism defines being “born again” / “saved by water and spirit”. There is a reason the Bible doesn’t use the word “alone” after faith in the verses Protestants use. Because there is always something else that goes with the subject of the sentence. “All Scripture is God breathed and useful for instruction” doesn’t mean “Only Scripture is God breathed…”. Jesus is God and he breathed on the Apostles in John 20:22 proves that “all” doesn’t mean “only”. And 2 Thessalonians 2:15 says we are to follow the teachings/traditions taught to us, both written and spoken. The Bible is all written. The spoken proves also that “all” doesn’t mean “only”. Contemplate these things hopefully? The Bible is like a chain, one verse leads and is linked to another verse. Jordan Peterson actually has a neat video with a diagram of the hundreds thousands or more of ways Bible verses are linked together. Protestantism teaches to memorize individual verses. But the problem with that is you have to also memorize every verse that is linked to that verse. That is where the “pillar of truth” the “church” comes in. There is a church out there Jesus established. He commanded that it convert all nations. It’s the single largest Christian religion in the world and has obeyed the most in Jesus’s command to convert all nations. Jesus said not even the gates of hell will prevail against the church. It can be found in history for well over a thousand years, Catholics see it mentioned in 100s AD. There is a “pillar of truth” out there. The Bible doesn’t define it as itself as is the basic definition of “Sola Scriptura”.

@@paulmualdeave5063 Yes we can live in peace but you have a view of the Gospel that is not what was taught by Jesus and the apostles.

I think it's the same in most Catholic countries

Italians call. all men Cristi sno​@@alessandrozanzarella9203

Italians call all men Christiano

Wdym?

He literally explained what heresy means wdym? Saying stuff like homosexuality being ok is heterodox according to his standarts, in the same way that people that believe that comsumption of marijuana is not a sin because it is similar to alcohol are not heretics. Being heterodox is not really ok either but it's far better than heresy because you can still be christian while commiting an error.

@@damaplehound But if you make that error a lifestyle, as most weed smokers and homosexuals do, you can't really claim to be a Christian.

@@LtCaveman well according to his standarts you can, of course there is a right way to be a christian and a wrong one, but as long as you believe the nicene creed you can be considered a christian, and from that follows a process of sanctification or cooperation with grace that should make you less sinful if you are a christian. If being wrong about what sin is should be considered heresy then all of humanity is inherently heretic because of original sin.

​​ @damaplehound Well about this subject, we should be thinking about if being called a christian is really enough, like, being christian alone does not save you, neither can the nicene creed do it. So is there even a point about, it making you less sinful? Even tho it migth not be seen as heresy, but to say that homosexuality is something that a christian could be doing is ok, then it could be framed as false teachering, because, a christian that sees its sin, and do not repent, becomes wicked person. And as we know, we cant run away from sin because we're corupted, but we need to repent, and live in search of holiness. Of course, this is my opinion about it, and im no theologic teacher either so i could be saying something wrong, but that's what i believe in. (ps. english is not my main language, so sorry for the bad english, but i hope that i have been clear)

I know it is

Many Latin Americans do also believe Catholics aren’t Christians, I come from a protestant Latin American family and I know many who reject Catholics as Christians

It's 99,9% an US thing. However, evangelicals and catholics in my country already are in eachother's throats so badly that I wouldn't be surprised if they pulled something like this.

yes its a very american thing. its definitely been due to the large protestant roots and also modern evangelical things. i also think that people are misinformed about a lot of things about catholicism or orthodoxy. But it seems people tend to forget about orthodoxy and just go for the western church

Sadly, yes

Aren't you that guy from the Polcompball Wiki? (Based, btw)

@@Theistocrat Now I haven't heard that name in years (Yes but I quit)

@@kaiserklausmouse Same. Cool to see you here, though.

@@Theistocrat what was your polcompball username?

@kaiserklausmouse are you American? According to your bio youʼre interested in Germany. I am German and live in Germany. Are you an ethnic German / have German ancestors? Your profil picture is a Madonna and the Bavarian coat of arms - are you Catholic and interested in the Liga?

Luckily the Magisterium means Catholic theology will never change

@@wandererofalbion1642 🎯

​@@wandererofalbion1642magisterium?

@@deutschermichel5807 The teaching office of the Church. The Holy Spirit guides the Church so that the Faith remains unchanged throughout all time and can be taught to all times as needed

@@wandererofalbion1642 but why then do the Bishops in Germany and the Amazon do heresy and schism today? I can't speak for South America, but in Germany, the Catholic Church openly questions Romeʼs authority and wants to single-handedly alter the Catholic teaching and Church structure

Same

Maybe, but it was a bad thing for All the damned souls who left the Church to become Protestant. Outside the Church there is no salvation

​@@frostbitemansion9610What do you mean by that?

Seconded. Worth the watch.

yeah, i feel like people think we worship the saints because we pray to them, when in reality, they are the Catholic Church in Heaven, atleast thats how I understand it

​@@alujis It is confusing when Catholics pray to the saints. I believe that I have no need to go through a saint to talk to God, and I also think that all Christians could be called saints.

@@wrenithilduincats 1. do you not ask you friends and family to pray for you? Because asking saints to pray for us is basically the same, except they are people already in Heaven, so closer to God. 2. Definitely not all Christians can be called a saints

Seems to me like the evil one at work. You see how hateful and angry and prideful of their own religion some protestants get, I hope everyone who believes in the word of God fully no matter what church they're in goes to heaven.

@@velvetcherrytree5230 ?? You are the ones that came up with "extra ecclesia nulla salus", yet we are the prideful ones? You can't just believe anything you want and claim to be Christian. Believing the Word of God fully and believing in Catholicism is sadly incompatible. Catholicism teaches: Catechism of the Catholic Church - Paragraph # 2010 "Moved by the Holy Spirit and by charity, *we can then merit for ourselves and for others* the graces needed for our sanctification, for the increase of grace and charity, and for *the attainment of eternal life.* Even temporal goods like health and friendship can be merited in accordance with God's wisdom." Whereas the Bible teaches this about those that believe they can merit salvation: "But Israel, which followed after the law of righteousness, *hath not attained to the law of righteousness.* 32 Wherefore? *Because they sought it not by faith, but as it were by the works of the law.* For they stumbled at that stumblingstone;" Romans 9 "Brethren, my heart's desire and prayer to God for Israel is, *that they might be saved.* 2 For I bear them record that they have a zeal of God, but not according to knowledge. 3 For *they being ignorant of God's righteousness, and going about to establish their own righteousness, have not submitted themselves unto the righteousness of God.* 4 For Christ is the end of the law for *righteousness to every one that believeth."* If you want all people who believe to be saved, you should not worry. Jesus Himself said: "Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me hath everlasting life." John 6:47 Everyone who believes this will be saved. Sadly catholics deny that all people that believe in Jesus have everlasting life, and lead people to believe that they have to join their church and partake of their rituals to be saved.

@@JosefFurg1611This is untrue though?? Catholics believe that Protestants are not in full communion with the body of Christ existing in this denomination, but they do not believe that Protestants need to become Catholic to go to heaven

The Roman Catholic church has in the past said you can. Not that it's essential, but you pay money, you get indulgences which allegedly shaves time off of purgatory, which itself is temporary anyway.

Plus, evangelicals today are a direct mockery of anything Luther ever preached about the matter, so it's not like they have the moral high-ground.

Please help me understand what this means

@@velvetcherrytree5230 It means anyone who tries to earn God's favor by doing good works does not understand the Gospel.

@@choicemeatrandy6572 okay thank you very much

@@BenjaminAnderson21 What makes you think that? Its not clear whether Paul is also talking about anyone who even adds a single thing to the gospel, or if he is talking about just the adding of jewish works to the gospel. And theres reasons that make adding jewish works to the gospel is not the same thing as adding the Catholic works to the gospel. Paul is saying that it is heresy to believe that the jewish law saves you specifically, because Christ is supposed to be the fulfillment of the jewish law. By going back to the law, you are essentially rejecting Christ who is the fulfillment of the jewish law, and by that you are limiting salvation to one particular group; to the jews, when salvation is supposed to be for the whole world: for the jews and the gentiles.

@@d.rey5743 I agree with what you are saying, but Paul in other passages does clearly say we are saved apart from works of the law in the context of the universal moral law. It is true that Christ fulfilled the ceremonial law in a different way than he fulfilled the moral law. But he still "fulfilled" the moral law in that he perfectly obeyed it in a way we never could, and it is this perfect righteousness that gives his propitiatory work on the cross power to save. In that way, we are still dishonoring the work of Christ in saying we need to first obey his commands to be joined to him. It is dishonoring because it implies that there is something lacking in his perfect righteousness that we must provide ourselves through works of our own. The scriptures make it clear that we must _first_ be declared righteous on the basis of his sacrifice, by faith and apart from works of the law. Only then are we given the power to truly uphold the law in our keeping of Christ's commands by faith and the Spirit. Works, as James says, "justify" us, that is, in that context, demonstrate our rightness before God and the likeness of the righteousness of Christ at work in us. This is why Jesus said, "if you love me, you will keep my commandments." Our obedience to God's moral law does not point to our own righteousness, but rather to the goodness and the genuineness of the new life we have received in Christ by faith. I'm not sure if the Catholic act of diminishing the gospel is the same as outright rejecting it, but I still do think it is horribly shameful because it obscures that important truth and thus dishonors Christ.

If it’s true that we’re saved by faith alone then we can’t also add the additional disclaimer of “providing that you have mentally agreed to our understanding of soteriology”. Personally I do not understand the insistence of some reformed Protestants of claiming that they believe in sola fide when in practice they very much act like they believe in works based salvation.

@Harry Garris Which protestants say they believe in Sola Fide and then act like they don't? Faith is more than mental agreement.

@@chemnitzfan654 reformed baptisms, mostly. From what I know about Lutherans you guys seem to have the most reasonable and well thought out understanding of how sola fide operates with respect to an actual living out of the faith.

@@harrygarris6921 All sola fide is salvation through cooperation unless you subscribe to the unbiblical view of irresistible grace. People just disagree on what is necessary cooperation and what isnt. Some say baptism is necessary, some disagree. Some say believing is enough, some say you need to confess with your mouth. No matter what people believe in, willful cooperation as a necessity is always part of it. So in the end, there is no "sola fide" without human efforts involved unless you believe god forces people to believe and others to disbelieve, which would make him an unjust and unloving god.

We did broke off of them because of their heretic practices lol.

@@AssadTheOne But their THEOLOGY wasn’t heretical. And the original Reformers never wanted to leave the Church, they were just protesting against the corruption, and they were kicked out.

​@@fighterofthenightman1057yep

"their heretic practices" lmao

Pride is a sin btw

i just watched it, went to read the comments, but can't remember that he said that. May be an other video?

@@Marcus12813 maybe

13:30

@@CatholicSpartan Ah yes! But he doesn't say "Jesus, probably"

Who are you talking about?

I've talked to that youtuber tho haha

Don't worry brother you're not alone

You should call yourself a follower of the Way. It's the original name of Christianity before the name Christian really caught on.

the Vatican calls us Christians, be careful there

Catholics arent cool

Which protestants? Plenty of protestant denominations follow that.

What Protestants mean by "faith alone" is different from what James is using the term to refer to here. "Justification by faith alone," in Protestant theology really means "being declared righteous by faith apart from works of the law," as taught in Paul's letters. When James is saying we can't show ourselves to be righteous by faith alone, he is referring to a dead kind of faith that doesn't produce good works, rather than the genuine faith Paul spoke of. Sincere faith, which Protestants refer to as "saving" faith, will always justify us in that it demonstrates our righteousness through works of the law, as taught by James. Protestants affirm this, they just reject the idea that it is by these works themselves that we receive the likeness of Christ's righteousness. Rather, it is by the works that we show ourselves to be righteous in Christ. This is what James is referring to when he uses the word "justify."

When did Paul Washer say that?

@@DrGero15 I don’t know exactly where the clip is from but if u watch “ reformed view of children” by Idol Killer you’ll see it

@@daughterofyeshuaa Thanks

I don't think Leighton gets a bad rep lol he's made at least 10,000 hours of video being a straight up pelagian. His views aren't entirely new, he's just rehashing a debate that Augustine had with Pelagius, Luther had with Erasmus, about the state of the human will. Without God's intervention, a man cannot respond to the Gospel in a salvific sense ie have it actually be legitimate, this is what Leighton and all his followers refuse to concede.

That's not something unique to Paul Washer. I've seen plenty of kids fly into a tantrum that made me think they would kill someone if they were big and strong enough to do so.

thoughts? Read the Bible. Jesus explicitly said so. The Catholic Church has Apostolic Succession

So that isn’t true. The reason the Catholic Church is the “true church” is because of its history. The Catholic Church is the first church, which was established by Jesus when he made Peter the first pope.

We can all agree that Christ himself was infallible as God, so to give Peter the reigns of the church after he dies and is risen is correct. But I've read tales of terrible, seemingly Godless popes. Biased men, which every single one of us is, are fallible, this does not change when a cardinal becomes a pope. God gave us the Bible, which had been kept from normal people for centuries. God bless Martin Luther for spreading the Bible to the masses, and cutting a monopoly on the gospel.

@@sillygoose9791 you donʼt understand the Catholic doctrine of infallibility. The Pope isnʼt infallible. He only is, when he declares a faith dogma ex cathedra. Also, it is a highly rigged view to only stress the personal sins of Roman Popes, while acting like the Eastern-Orthodox or Protestants were and are any better. If you look at Patriarch Cyril of Moscow and all the Rus, who is a former KGB-agent all supports the War in Ukraïne, has millions of dollars worth, is a friend and ally of President Putin, etc. If you look at the Greek Orthodox Church, which holds almost more lands in the Greek Republik than the state and earns a big revenue, making it the de-facto political decision makers. If you look at the Serbian Orthodox Church and the War Crimes against Muslim Albanians ans the destruction of mosques in Kosovo and Bosnien-Herzegovina, etc. Not to mention the false prosperity gospel that the US-Americans preach, the lgbtq-movement, which is supported by the protestant churches, the Nazi regime, which was supported by the evangelical, lutheran and reformed churches, etc.

The church isn’t perfect because it is run by man, who is inherently sinful. Bad Popes do not delegitimize the Church. God did not give you the Bible, God did howeve give us the Church when he gave he keys to Matthew. What Luther did lead us to modern day liberal church’s. The idea of splitting off whenever you disagree leads to the slow degradation of the faith. God bless.

Catholic bro here, and I LOVE my orthodox and protestant brothers and sisters in Christ alike. While I have not been to an orthodox church yet, I would love to because they're BEAUTIFUL with all of the icons!

Yep, thats it

Probably because of how corrupt the church could get in its history, I guess.

I would say the Orthodox Church is the same Church just as much as the Catholics are, as well as the historic Protestants.

They litterally believe that jews migrated to modern day united states centuries before good boats were a thing, they debate themselves lol

It would be nice to know how to give back when your broken as fuck. I may consider going to church today. The theology is inspiring my intellectual side to pick everything apart.

@@tektitetv You should totally go to church! I'm personally ACNA (Anglican Church of North America) Anglican :). But Christ came to "to give light to those who sit in darkness and in the shadow of death, to guide our feet into the way of peace" Luke 2:79, and as he says "Come to me all who labor and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest. Take my yoke upon you, and learn from me, for I am gentle and lowly in heart and you will find rest for your souls. For my yoke is easy, and my burden is light" Matthew 11:28-30 "In him was life, and the life was the light of men. The light shines in the darkness and the darkness has not overcome it" John 1:5 and he was sent "to bind up the brokenhearted, to proclaim liberty to the captives" Isaiah 61:1

yes

Tell that to the eastern Orthodox lol

Lol sure but being OG is completely irrelevant when you’re clearly adding to the Bible and adding the gospel. Doesn’t require an “infallible magisterium” to understand the gospel. God isn’t the author of confusion, man is, and the papist caused and still do cause a ton of confusion. But hey! Have to take that money to build St. Peter’s amirite?

@@florida8953 Catholic Bible: Composed in 382, with 73 books considered canon. Protestant Bible: Composed around 1530, with 66 books considered canon. Catholicism: The scholarship, theological development, and debate from the brightest minds and Saints across 1000 years and more, all dedicated to the Scripture and Gospel, and to understanding the Truth and Word of The Lord God. Protestantism: Sola Scriptura, and Faith Alone.

@@francisberinger1312 _with 73 books considered canon._ This isn't true at all.

How has the Orthodox church been so thoroughly forgotten?

@derDeutsche-mh2zj what other denominations?

No, because true faith has works, if there are no works they have no faith. Faith alone stands.

@@bedzyJames 2:24:You see that a person is justified by works and not by faith alone.

@@lukaspersson4051 For by grace you have been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God; not as a result of works, so that no one may boast. Ephesians 2:8‭-‬9. So unless we are to say that the word of God is contradicting itself, the only logical answer is that the faith they speak of includes works as an outworking of faith, not as a salvific requirement. It is people with faith that do good works, not people who do good works gain faith.

@@bedzy salvation is a gift from god but justification is from faith+works. You need to be baptized and eat Jesus’s flesh and boood for eternal life and then you have to try to not sin and repent. Hebrews 10:26 says that if you sin intentionally there’s no longer a sacrifice for your sins (you lose your salvation)

@@lukaspersson4051 This righteousness is given through faith in Jesus Christ to all who believe. There is no difference between Jew and Gentile, for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, and all are justified freely by his grace through the redemption that came by Christ Jesus. Romans 3:22‭-‬24 So unless Paul and James disagreed, there has to be another answer. Earlier in James 2 we see many a reason to believe that, because James was responding to people who profess faith and do no works, hence the famous phrase faith without works is dead, so how to we test faith? By its works, and how do we justify before other humans that we have faith? Those same works, as it shows our faith and makes us better stewards of the Gospel of Jesus Christ. In Romans however, we see that Paul is talking about justification to GOD, the perfect holy and righteous God, compared to whom our works cannot compete. Therefore before God we are justified by the grace of God, through faith alone. And to exemplify this, and show our faith to other humans and steward the Gospel, as well as to testify to our faith, we do good works. We are just talking about justification in different contexts. Have a blessed day brother 😁

I believe he already did, check out Council of Trent

In Catholicism we try to make it clear that none of us worship Mary, the Pope or the Saints. They’re all venerated, but not adored and worshiped like Christ and God. Really the only person that I think is approached more with worship (which is heretical) is Mary, but the majority of Catholics do not worship her like many believe we do. There are some people within the Church who DO worship Mary, and THEY are committing a heresy by holding her equal to God, but the Church does not ever encourage us to worship her or hold her to an equal value to Christ and God. The way I was always taught was, much like the ecumenical hierarchy with priests and bishops, there’s a veneration hierarchy with beatified individuals. Saints are venerated as holy individuals who were so virtuous in life that they are capable of miracles even in death (dulia is the word for them), Mary is above the Saints BUT BELOW Christ and God (hyperdulia), we venerate her because she is the Mother of God (Theotokos). And then there’s God, who we worship, adore and glorify (Latria). I will admit that I understand the concern. For a large part of my life I thought that it was heretical for us to even mention Mary and the Saints with any esteem, but over time it became clearer to me (because I work for a Catholic diocese and spend a lot of time talking with priests) that while we do hold the Saints in esteem, and Mary even moreso, we don’t worship them at all, we just appreciate them for acting as models of virtue and “agape”, and we appreciate Mary slightly more for giving birth to Christ (the whole thing that comes from is a quote, I don’t remember it entirely, but it goes like “blessed is the womb from which you were birthed”)

None of those things are even remotely like idolatry

they are catholic in the same way as a catholic in america or italy or israel. they just practice by a different rite

​@@steakfilly5199do you think it could or should be possible someday, that the Catholic Church adopts some “reformed” rite? E.g. if a major return to communion with Rome happened in “protestant” churches, do you think it would be possible to leave them their liturgical traditions etc.?

This already exists somewhat for Anglicans, check this out en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anglican_Use

​@@deutschermichel5807 it's already happening man. Back then latin rite churches (which is the rite more than half Roman Catholic chuches uses) used the "Traditional Latin Mass" (the pastor don't look back at the people so that he will not disrespect God by turning his back on him, everyone head towards the altar and the tabernacle, etc etc) but after the second Vatican council back in 1960's (you could check it on your own, I'm writing this using my memories), they decided to use the Novus ordo mass. This novus ordo mass is used to get lay people and lukewarm Catholics to go to church (like as you know, mostly the religion was inherited from our parents, so we don't really care about theology. The advancement of technology even being one of the factors in this modern world that many christians don't really care about theology), or to simplify it, the church will do anything so that people go to church. And yes, this is wild

​​@@and12345.conan. think you are missing one of the reasons why the Novus Ordo was accepted into official catholic teaching, it wasn't only to get people to go to mass, it was also to incorporate the genius of different cultures into the mass, nowhere in the bible does it teach that mass should be conducted in latin, or that the priest needs to face towards the altar (although it is a great feature) an nowhere does it say to sing a specific genre of music. For people outside the western cultural tradition such as myself, the TLM rite can seem a bit alien when you grow up around a completely different culture.

Well this is a matter of perspective and since Zoomer is a Presbyterian, he would take the protestant perspective and you should keep that in mind if you like his channel despite disagreeing with him (and that is fine). BUT that should not be important because calling Catholics heterodox does not change the mains point of his video which is saying that "Catholics should not be considered heretics by protestants even when we hold the protestant position" and i think we can all agree with that.

@Pedro Guimarães Heterodox by definition means not conforming to orthodox, or original/correct beliefs. In order for something to be Heterodox it has to have departed from an original source of Truth, in this case that would be the Original church founded by Christ. That would be the Catholic church as it was for 1000 years before the schism. Therefore it is impossible for the Catholic church to be Heterodox because they were originally the western part of the one, universal Church. With this in mind, all Protestant denominations are Heterodox with some of them following heresies. That's why it's ridiculous for Zoomer to say the Catholic Church is heterodox at all, it's nothing but projection.

@@Traditional_American both the Catholic Church and the Orthodox Churches are direct descendatns of the state Church of the Roman Empire. A direct apostolic succesion.

@@Oszczywilski I agree.

@@Traditional_American 🎯

protestant "christianity" is wrong lol

Also having the catholic fathers forgiving your sins during confession, when only jesus can forgive

@@oldsportgaming the sins that must confessed are mortal sins. In Catholicism there’s 2 kinds of sins: mortal and venial. One good reason for this sacrament is that Jesus himself set it up by giving the apostles the mediation to forgive sins.

@@mauriciorv228 can i see specific scripture in the bible that jesus gave permission to mortal humans to forgive sin?

@@oldsportgaming ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-xtvjmsPmVpw.html

@Micheal John 20:23 “Whoever's sins you forgive, they are forgiven them. Whoever's sins you retain, they have been retained." Jesus speaks to the apostles granting them this authority. Through apostolic succession priests and bishops have this authority.

The church. Who compiled the laws of gravity? Newton. Did the church make the Bible inerrant, or did it recognize the work of God? Jesus Christ. Do you think you have any more claim to being that church than the Orthodox church? Do not insist that you were right and they were wrong; give me a reason for thinking one was the original, and one was created in 1054. No. The Catholic church continues to advance over and against the stronghold of Satan, bringing salvation to the world. Its errors are not the gates of Hell prevailing, because they are not heresies.

1) The Catholic Church 2) Jesus Christ 3) No

Who misunderstands and preaches a false gospel? Rome.

@@florida8953, preaching false gospels is entirely the domain of protestantism. Only in the Catholic Church is the fullness of the Truth found.

@@brucebarber4104 it's rhetorical