Why Rodney Stark Is A Red Pill For Protestants on Church History +How Bishops Started 1st Hospitals! 

I have run into many former Protestants who either became Catholic, High Anglican, or Orthodox because his work helped transform their view of church history and shifted their paradigm

Same here.

@@barrelagedfaith I do try to tell the crankier Protestants to read the Early Church Fathers.... They don't of course. But looking at the history of the Church (pre schism) would educate them about how far they are away from it.

@@barrelagedfaiththis very simple… the New Testament was written in the context of the Old Testament and 2nd Temple Period… period

@@JC_Forum_of_Christ correct. What is your point? Some of the church fathers lived within 2nd Temple Period Judaism and were mentored by the apostles themselves. Aramaic/Syriac ancient Christians like St. Ephrem of Syria also have a deep connection to this world of 2nd Temple Period Judaism. Here is one example: Jews prayed for the dead in 2nd Temple Period Judaism

Thats wonderful!

I recommend also Fr. Andrew Damick's Orthodoxy and Heterodoxy. It covers a lot of ground.

@@yvoennsche Oh i have that one in my Audible too!

I found the Religion of the Apostles to be a brutal awakening. I don’t know how someone can remain Protestant after reading that.

Not doubt, more attention should be payed to the East. Have you read historian Philip Jenkin's book "The Golden Age of Christianity? which I referenced in this clip?

He was more of a historian and sociologist and so he would likely make observations about the past on how all 3 models (urban, rural, desert) renewed Christian civilization at times. I don't think we should abandon any of it! Different people and different families have different callings on where they should live throughout seasons of their lives. We should all ask "Where does God want me right now?" and either stay put or get moving after He directs our steps!

It would be great to revitalize the faith in cities, but the challenges are great. I could not imagine building a church in any city I am familiar with in the US, at least. Most cities have closed dozens of churches, many of them very beautiful, for lack of worshippers. Cities today aren’t really cities, in the traditional sense. They are just warehouses that store large numbers of people in a small space. Families can’t afford to live in today’s cities. There’s little to no industry, but only office buildings, restaurants and retail stores. Churches today draw people from far and wide, and require room for cars to park. Basically, despite the fact that there are many souls in cities, they are, at best, the “rocky ground” from the parable, but are actually more likely to be thorns. There’s little to no good soil.

​@@johncassani6780 Nonsense, my friend. If you think modern cities are bad, think about how bad it was for the apostles to go into the very epicenter of pagan Rome, now that's some rocky/thorny ground (or so one would presume)! And yet, what a fruitful harvest they bore. As regards churches being built or closed, the fact of the matter is that the vast majority of those closed churches are from denominations that have sublimated themselves to the will of the world rather than God, and of course their own self-will. Why go to mass or a Sunday sermon that gives the same spiritual nourishment as staying home and watching shows? Why bother being a "Christian" materialist when you can just stay home and be a right proper materialist slugabed? Quasi-Christianity is what's dying in the West, and the Orthodox Christian Church must resist being influenced by it, as many parts of her thankfully do. That resistance is why the Orthodox Church (certainly in America according to the statistics I've read from Alexei Krindatch) is building more churches than it is closing; She has not sublimated herself to the will of the world (nor is she under violent persecution in the west like she is in the middle east for example). In my anecdotal experience, my state is currently building/has built several Orthodox temples in the last couple years. It must be said however that there are elements of the laity and hierarchy that would very much like for the Church to submit to the world and have pushed for it to deleterious effect, e.g. Elpidophoros, the women of St. Phoebe's Center pushing for female ordination (they want to turn the Orthodox Church into Anglicans 2.0, eww), etcetera. I know some people don't like to name names out of charity, but at some point, one must be bold in calling out the unrepentant lest they drag parts of the Church down with them.

Many people were treating all sorts of diseases before Christianity and in the far east. There were also medical clinics and places where certain people like soldiers were treated. Far eastern monks were being treated in the their monastery hospitals. However, many scholars today recognize that St. Basil and the Byzantines were attributed with starting the first hospital complexes/campus in a systematic way that treated all people and a number of diseases. This model spread throughout Christian lands both in the Roman empire but even outside of it. Antioch wasn't far from the empire's border. Armenia was its own kingdom.

If I may be blunt: Yes, the people permitting contraceptives are watering down the teaching. Abstinence is the self-denying method of contraception obviously preferred by the Church, if any method of "birth control" is to be used at all. The whole purpose of modern contraceptives is to obtain all the pleasure of sex with none of the responsibility that comes with its natural result: Children!

Sadly, many Christian couples from all sorts of backgrounds (Protestants, Catholics, Orthodox) ignorantly use hormonal birth control which causes abortion. When I was a Protestant, hardly anyone even thought about this topic or cared to. Orthodoxy, like Catholicism, completely forbids hormonal contraception because it is abortive and wants couples to keep the marital act united with procreation in general. Fr. Kosmas has a good pamphlet on this: www.orthodoxtalks.com/hormonal-contraceptives/ There is also no doubt that the church fathers wanted to keep marital relations united with procreation and that the early church had big families because of this which was very different from the pagan Roman families who practiced contraception, abortion, and infanticide. The problem arises in difficult situations such as spacing out children for the health of the mother. Some Orthodox priests completely forbid all forms of contraception and would simply encourage fasting and natural family planning (see Fr. Josiah Trenham ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-CJxHu93fQIQ.htmlsi=hD2Mv7qocBEIvM1C). Other Orthodox priests will allow non-abortive family planning (such as natural family planning or condoms) following similar moral reasoning of Pope Francis during the Zika virus outbreak. He stated, ""Abortion is not a lesser evil. It is a crime. It is killing one person to save another. It is what the Mafia does... It is a crime. It is an absolute evil." Pope Francis went on to say that "avoiding pregnancy is not an absolute evil." The Vatican press office described the pope's remarks on contraception: "Using contraceptives to avoid pregnancy can be acceptable in difficult situations, he said, noting that Pope Paul VI authorized nuns in Africa to do the same half a century ago when they were threatened with rape." So in the big picture Catholics and Orthodox are generally on the same page theologically when it comes to church teaching on keeping marriage and the marital act united with procreation since it is rooted in the fathers. Orthodox Christians should seek the guidance of their spiritual father when difficult matters arise.

@@barrelagedfaith thanks for the response but Pope Paul VI (author of Humane Vitae condemning contraception) did not give permission to use artificial contraceptives in extreme cases. Can you provide one quote from Pope Paul VI stating otherwise?

@@kevinmc62 I am very aware of the Catholic position in Humane Vitae. I was simply stating that there are Orthodox priests that hold to that same perspective in it via the church fathers (Fr. Josiah Trenham) while other Orthodox priests may allow non-abortive contraception employing the same moral reasoning (the health of mother and baby in difficult circumstances) that Pope Francis did during the zika virus. You asked a question and I was simply responding about the Orthodox perspectives present.

@@kevinmc62 1) I should add that it was the Vatican office who made that claim about Pope Paul VI in relation to Pope Francis' comments. Not me, if you want historical documentation, feel free to contact the Vatican for their sources on their comment during the Zika outbreak. 2) If he did give permission, then it harmonizes well with the Catholic guidance for hospitals on the topic: The Ethical and Religious Directives for Catholic Health Care Services of the US bishops state: "Compassionate and understanding care should be given to a person who is the victim of sexual assault. Health care providers should cooperate with law enforcement officials and offer the person psychological and spiritual support as well as accurate medical information. A female who has been raped should be able to defend herself against a potential conception from the sexual assault. If, after appropriate testing, there is no evidence that conception has occurred already, she may be treated with medications that would prevent ovulation, sperm capacitation, or fertilization." See page 21 in PDF Directive 36; www.usccb.org/issues-and-action/human-life-and-dignity/health-care/upload/Ethical-Religious-Directives-Catholic-Health-Care-Services-fifth-edition-2009.pdf

I’ve seen and heard numerous claims of the Roman Catholic Church instituting a Christian-dominant syncretism, and each of them is squishy at best.

You are preaching to the choir. Most people need to revise their understanding of Christianity in the Roman Empire as well as learn for the first time the spread of Christianity in areas outside of the Empire such as the Persian Empire, India and Ethiopia. Btw, all those places look and sound Orthodox.

I believe that Egypt was part of the Roman Empire in the first centuries A.D. especially the northern areas centered on Alexandria. Armenia was not part of the Empire and became the first officially Christian nation in A.D. 300.

@@ArnoldConrad Correct! Armenia adopted it as their kingdom's religion around 300 AD I believe. Egypt was in the Roman Empire but Ethiopia wasn't. Christianity grew very early there and was adopted as the kingdom's state religion around 330AD I believe.

Yeah, that’s not flying. I’ll stick with St. John Henry Newman: "To be deep in history is to cease to be a Protestant."

@@JohnAlbertRigali Like much of Rome, Newman was wrong.

@@pete3397 That’s an opinion. “There are not one hundred people in the United States who hate the Catholic Church, but there are millions who hate what they wrongly perceive the Catholic Church to be.” -Ven. Fulton John Sheen

The video doesn't have the red pill moment. Reading his book series is that moment (for most Protestants particularly evangelicals) who often view the middle ages as the dark ages filled with novelties introduced by Emperor Constantine.

Because it’s entirely anachronistic and nonsensical to identify a 16th century revolution with an ancient church. Low hanging fruit…