Did Protestantism exist in the early church? - KingdomCraft

[@mmtoss6530]

Protestantism is purified Catholicism, so yes.

[@JoWilliams-ud4eu]

All the beliefs of protestantism existed somewhere in the church fathers very early on, but not all the Marian dogmas are found, and no one venerated icons. Even apologists like Trent Horn would admit this.

[@jdotoz]

Lol no

[@Elidenzer]

based answer

[@BasiliscBaz]

@@mmtoss6530 Well your right atheist is just protestantism purified from God , and Actual Essence of Christianity

[@zeroisnine]

Larpers need to touch grass

[@Frazier16]

Orthodox Kyle ain't gonna like this one

[@AndrewFerguson-hx7mn]

Voice of Reason as well

[@JulkaLewaczka]

Who's that?

[@Frazier16]

An Orthodox KZbinr ​@@JulkaLewaczka

[@BritishElectionsYoutuber]

​@@AndrewFerguson-hx7mn true but I feel like Kyle would be a bit saltier than Voice of Reason

[@BasiliscBaz]

Honestly he have right to don't like it

[@harrygarris6921]

Protestantism is not just a collection of theological propositions though, it’s a distinct movement of people, ideas, politics, etc. It’s a chapter in the historical narrative.

[@cskandrsgyrgy]

Redeemed Alpha is already living among us and is prepairing for his task, playing videogames and listening to Redeemed Zoomer. When the time comes, he will rise and bring redemption to the Fortnite servers.

[@TradForChrist]

I was not expecting the last part😂

[@ConstantiaVerted]

The One Who Will Come After. :) Hey I know it's retro but I personally like Pokemon Go. :) The Alpha could name his pokemon after Christian concepts and get them to dominate gyms. :)

[@timhartman3359]

Redeemed Skibidi

[@roneldell5137]

Can't wait for Redeemed Sigma

[@James.D.B.]

​@@ConstantiaVertedOr maybe even church fathers, like a gyarados, polytoad, or porygon-z named Polycarp

[@billotron5521]

Bro is trying to give Kyle an aneurysm 😭

[@AmirSatt]

Caths and Orthobros on their way to claim that they are the only true church (it was predestined)

[@__12315]

😂

[@christsavesreadromans1096]

If scripture says there’s only one faith, one Lord, and one baptism, why would you think there’s more than one church?

[@amirsmith9269]

same name bros

[@amirsmith9269]

what denomination are you

[@AmirlovesJesus]

​@@amirsmith9269 YOO my name's Amir too haha

[@vinyltherapy9410]

The reason orthodox, Catholic, oriental, Assyrian church of the east claim they are the ‘one’ true church is because they were all technically present when the church was in fact one church in first millennium. So surprisingly they do all have valid claims.

[@spinjitzubrickstudios1423]

Online ortho bros rallying the troops rn

[@Theophoruz]

Prot boys prot boys, whatcha gonna do, whatcha gonna do when they come for you

[@Thebasedheritic]

​@@TheophoruzI'm happy that I'm a heretic

[@Thatoneguy-pu8ty]

@@Thebasedheritic I see where u get the username lol

[@Thebasedheritic]

@@Thatoneguy-pu8ty yea lol

[@Cleveland951]

Many e-trads who became Catholics 5 minutes ago for the aesthetics are here rn

[@ConstantiaVerted]

I somewhat was one. Then Pope Francis made me see through Catholicism because he's so blatantly making it up as he goes along. So I started thinking, well I was never that sure about that Mary bit either...' etc etc.

[@blissseeker4719]

​@@ConstantiaVertedread the bible, beginning at the New Testament, my brother in Christ. Best decision you will make on your walk.

[@ConstantiaVerted]

@@blissseeker4719 For sure. I'm lovin' it. Praise God.

[@blissseeker4719]

@@ConstantiaVerted Praise God indeed, my beloved brother in Christ! Let us remain humble always as we draw closer to the truth and indeed, closer to God, together.

[@DoctorDewgong]

@@Cleveland951 "these people follow apostolic traditions spanning thousands of years? They must be stupid and only joined because chant sounds cool"

[@kuafer3687]

I feel like the Early Church is very idealized because of the Apostles and Martyrs but just reading the Pauline episles is enough to see what a mess it was. And add the numerous weirdo Gnostic heresies to that....honestly not much has changed.

[@TitusCastiglione1503]

Even the orthodox fathers often had odd ideas that are pretty blatantly unbiblical.

[@matt66716]

@@TitusCastiglione1503to you protestants any dogma that you don’t agree with is unbiblical 😅

[@TitusCastiglione1503]

@@matt66716 Well, which Protestants? By no means all of us are wacko Baptists. And, as is reasonable, Protestants tend reject doctrines are not supported by scripture. This is not unreasonable. And, in my original post, I was referring more to bizarre ideas like baptism only clears away past sins (not future ones), and that apostates, murderers and adulterers are to be permanently excommunicated without any possible reconciliation. Both of which were held by parts of the orthodox early church.

[@zacharyglasgow5351]

As an Anglican I’d want to know where Congregationalist and Presbyterian polity were. Ignatius was taught by John. He didn’t pull three offices of ministry from no where.

[@ChristianEphraimson]

Remember he can cherrypick the Fathers to support any claim he wants to exist. He essentially says that at around 12:45

[@zacharyglasgow5351]

I respect him and I believe he believes what he says. I want to know why he believes it. I don’t want to assume malicious intent.

[@clivejungle6999]

In the 39 Articles we quote Jerome on the canon, but then Jerome also says the bishops was a development. I think it was a necessary development as the Church grew in size and the office of Apostle passed. But we also use a Father for one thing and not another.

[@JonBrase]

​@@zacharyglasgow5351By the standards of 1st century Judaism, Jesus was a lay teacher (not a Levite, nor a member of the Aaronic priesthood), as were, from what I can tell, most Rabbis of the 1st century. So arguably congregationalist polity is established by the way Jesus chose to do his ministry (he could have chosen to become incarnate in the Aaronic lineage if that had suited his purposes. I imagine many Priests expected the Messiah to come from that lineage).

[@user-dc7im7cy4v]

Jerome mentions it. There are several early people who reference bishops-plural-in a city. And people who talk about only two offices (Polycarp, Clement). I'd have to look again (so don't trust this statement), but my current guess is that in Ignatius' time, the bishop was something like the senior pastor.

[@SinceAD33]

What I’ve found is that everything the Reformers got correct, the Catholic Church also has. Just because Calvin quotes St. Augustine on predestination doesn’t mean anything special. We have the Augustinian and Thomistic traditions in the Church. Calvin departed completely by saying a true regenerated Christian can never fall away. Total innovation. Everything they got wrong is absent in the Fathers. The Fathers did not reject iconography for the same reason iconoclasts did. St Jerome believed the bishop to be distinct from a priest because he makes it clear several times that *only* a bishop can ordain. (I have a video on this) St. Augustine or any father saying “Scripture fixes the rule of our faith” or “Scripture is sufficient for XYZ” isn’t Sola Scriptura. Many modern Catholic theologians say this still, and I would sure hope they do. Communion in one kind (and its preservation after the service) was practiced early on to the sick and at times to the laity. Christ also gives communion in one kind in Luke 24, which the fathers said was the Eucharist. The Reformation does not hold well to the snowball example because now you have… multiple snowballs, which is concerning.

[@Procopius464]

It's unrealistic to expect everyone in the world to belong to one denomination. And if that ever were to happen, there would be nothing to stop that institution from (at the very least) providing terrible service. Having no competition, or other options, is a terrible idea, whether it's government, business, or church institutions.

[@BasiliscBaz]

@@SinceAD33 cool

[@BasiliscBaz]

@@Procopius464 that's Devil's work, create schism so men Can't know which church os original and which fabricated

[@newman476]

@@Procopius464Why stop at denominations? Why not give mankind multiple religions? If there are multiple denominations, either one of them has the truth or none of them do. Christ prayed that we all would be one. Acting like division and discord aren’t products of the enemy is nonsensical.

[@Procopius464]

@@newman476 The Bible has the truth. Pick whatever church you think lines up the most with that, and which also feeds you spiritually. I changed churches 2 times for that reason, it's not a big deal. Other religions do exist because not everyone accepts Jesus, and all those people are going to hell as a result unless they get saved. If you are one of those people who thinks that only your church is legitimate, then most likely it's probably not. I could also say that everyone should join my church, if we are just going to have one church, but I don't want everyone to join unless they are going to assimilate and become like us. I don't want to have people pushing for different customs, styles, and types of music. It's better they should stay in their own denominations, if they like doing things a certain way and are unwilling to dispense with it.

[@MatiasGamalielTolmoSuarez]

The thing is, in protestant reformation NO CHURCH kept the same as it was before reformation, a group accepted the reformation and another opposite group accepted the counter reformation which was a reformation at the end, just that contrary in some sense to protestant reformation. So if churches which accepted reformation are just 500 yo, then Trent Catholics are only 500 yo (and even less considering the enormous changes in Vatican II, mostly are more close to protestant than to counter reformation)

[@jdotoz]

Trent didn't teach anything new.

[@Thatoneguy-pu8ty]

​@@jdotoz It did tho. Deuterocanon canonized, papal infallibility defined, sacraments made to be 7, and others.

[@jdotoz]

@@Thatoneguy-pu8ty All those things were already understood in the Church. You have to understand how councils work: they don't teach new things, they address controversies by clearly defining what has always been true. These things didn't come out of nowhere.

[@Thatoneguy-pu8ty]

​@@jdotoz If it was already universally accepted, then they wouldnt have needed to have a council to tell people to accept it and deny other teachings 🤷‍♂

[@calebrohnke2176]

@@jdotoz something wouldnt be controversial if everyone in the church agreed on that topic prior to it being addressed

[@ewertonaraujofilho]

God bless you, my brothers and sisters in Christ!

[@DepravedSinner]

Why do catholics always accuse luther as being the fault for millions of splinter sects instead of blaming nestorius or arius 🧐

[@WanderingThief]

Your point on communion in both kinds against the Orthodox is flat out false. The Orthodox have always (much more consistently than EITHER Catholics or Protestants) done communion in both kinds, which we continue to this day. Intinction is in both kinds.

[@letsopenthebiblewithtylueh6477]

That was a really good explanation. I haven’t heard it explained like that before. Good job, dude!

[@josuerivera6559]

I wonder if Redeemed Zoomer is an Elite Smash Bros Player

[@gospelhearth]

Like my grandpappy used to say, "if your doctrine only goes back to St. Chungus in the 6th century, you should question that doctrine."

[@mikehiggins1924]

Lol

[@carsonianthegreat4672]

Catholic Dogma does back to Christ.

[@DruckerYTA]

Here comes the comment storm…

[@Eliyahu_777]

Orthodox Church is the one true church

[@Thebasedheritic]

Stop yapping buddy​@@Eliyahu_777

[@roses993]

Hi zoomer! Thanks for these videos. Must say that the most free and greatest country in the world (USA) was not catholic or orthodox, it was predominantly protestant! It was mostly Presbyterian at 1st actually. Love our protestant faith! Thanks for the great videos!😊

[@maxandre7986]

Zoomer, can you make a video on the reformed way how to pick up chicks? The singles are lonely here

[@JoWilliams-ud4eu]

I think he already has, but I agree. He should make another one.

[@elchivo3770]

Calvanist: You were predestined to be single 🗿

[@legacyandlegend]

​@@elchivo3770 😂😂😂

[@ThePhantomCoder]

wrong mindset bro, instead of trying to get more girls focus on trying to find your wife

[@JoWilliams-ud4eu]

@@ThePhantomCoder agree

[@littlepieceofplankton4866]

I’m a devout Cradle Catholic but you bring up many excellent points

[@gang.jesus_]

I dont think ive been this early for an RZ video

[@JoWilliams-ud4eu]

I'm glad to see you here so soon

[@BasiliscBaz]

14:53 church fathers were Christians **SHOCKED**

[@sk00k]

Um AgHgCkScHyUaLlY tHeY wErE mUsLiMs 🤡🤡🤡🤡

[@albionpetoku3844]

😲

[@WarriorcatGerda]

WHAT!?

[@KaiserSuprema]

No they were MY denomination

[@BasiliscBaz]

@@KaiserSuprema nooo they were my !!! 😭😭😭 🤣🤣

[@letrewiarz]

How can you believe that Holy Spirit is guiding the development of doctrine and at the same time think that a sinful practise (veneration of icons) has been accepted by an entire Church for circa 700 years and is still the dominant opinion of Christians? Sure, God could allow individual saints to teach falsehood or allow parts of the Church to accept some false opinion, but here we have an universal approval of a practise that is (according to you) verbatim rejected by the Word of God and all of the early Church. It seems clear to me that you have to reject either iconoclasm or guidence of the Holy Spirit.

[@Thatoneguy-pu8ty]

Accretion =/= guidance of the Holy Spirit

[@letrewiarz]

@@Thatoneguy-pu8ty It's not a harmless accretion, if iconoclasts are right, then iconodulia is idolatry. RZ literally thinks that gold calf was supposed to be a statue of YHWH and God wanted to kill all the Isrealites for it. Do you really think that Holy Spirit guides the Church AND allowed all of Christians to fall into error that almost caused all of God's people to be killed?

[@Thatoneguy-pu8ty]

⁠@@bikesrcool_1958According to ur comment I read u r still a Prot 😂

[@JonBrase]

By that argument, how could the dominant opinion of the scribes and the Pharisees at the time of Christ be that Jesus was not the Christ? Did they not sit in Moses' seat? The Holy Spirit guides, but men do not always follow.

[@letrewiarz]

@@JonBrase These two situations are not at all comparable: 1. Old Law did not have the same promises as did the New. For the Church, Jesus gave His Spirit, that will lead us to all truth, this was not done for the Jews. 2. Rejection of Jesus by Pharisees was not universal, as there were those, who accepted Jesus. 3. Even if all Pharisees rejected Jesus, they did not make up all of Israel, so this would still not be universal. Meanwhile, as far as I know iconodulia was part of every Christian church by the time of Protestant reformation. As for "Holy Spirit guides, but people don't always listen", it may apply on a smaller scale, where God allows parts of the Church to fall, but if all of orthodox Christianity just casually falls into idolatry and succesfully imposes it on all believers, then the promises of Christ are utterly void, because He clearly is either unwilling or unable to stop it. It specifically makes no sense under calvinism, where you cannot resist God's grace.

[@juliand607]

No. Kind regards, Catholic keyboardwarrior.

[@SethAurelius94]

Aww crap. I've dipped the bread in the wine before to make it less like styrafoam.

[@DepravedSinner]

Are you taking those mass produced prepackaged - styrofoam chip with grape juice packets lol The non-denominational church I was raised in used those sometimes, long story short I'm very glad to be in a presbyterian church now where I receive actual wine and bread the way God intended 💪 (the bread is crackers but I'll let that slide since I don't think that makes a difference)

[@SethAurelius94]

@@DepravedSinner yeah but crazy enough it's happening at a Lutheran church.

[@DepravedSinner]

@@SethAurelius94 Ain't no way 💀

[@karolswirniak]

I thought Eastern Orthodox generally do Communion in both kinds...

[@ChristianEphraimson]

I believe so although Im not 100% sure After the prayers and preparation; they place the lamb (bread) in the blood (wine), then the priest give them a spoonful of both. The body, with the blood being absorbed into the body with some residual blood on the outside. They take both elements in one bite.

[@diogomelo7897]

They do, and historically this was a big dividing point with the Catholics, is just that the Orthodox typically put the bread into the wine, and give to the laity with a spoon, which Redeemed is considering as one kind

[@spyridon7669]

We do. RZ is a decent chap but he misunderstands a lot of Orthodoxy, probably because his personal experience of online Orthodoxy hasn't been great. I've never attended an Orthodox Church, ever, that used intinction. I think he misunderstands what it is, or is insisting that you have to take the Body and Blood as two separate items or it isn't quite correct? Or something.

[@carsonianthegreat4672]

Catholics do too.

[@jonathanVA44]

"I have to do their homework for them" - yes you do. That, my friend, is clearly your calling. Because the rest of us work all day, have kids and a wife to look after in the evening, get to bed and are completely shattered. We don't have time to listen to a sermon on sermon audio in the evening, and so it's Sunday only for that. And you know what, yours are, quite honestly, some of the easiest-to-watch theology videos out there. So I genuinely think you've stumbled across one of those Biblical instances where they guy says something ironically, or not meaning it, like "Ye know nothing at all" (John 11:49) from Caiaphas, or "He trusted on the LORD that he would deliver him: let him deliver him, seeing he delighted in him" in the Psalms (22:8), which was intended as mockery to David, and in fact it turns out to have a deep meaning beyond what they could possibly have imagined. Genuinely, I feel this is your calling. You are VERY good at doing this kind of thing. And I thank you.

[@slumptrid]

The issue most Catholics and Eastern Orthodox Christians have in their thinking of church history and the church fathers is that they can only support one side of the argument. For instance, I was in a Reformed Baptist’s live and there were two Catholics in chat. The two Catholics bring up the common critique of Protestantism, saying, “why were none of the church fathers Protestant?” When the Reformed Baptist correctly brought up some quotes of the fathers sharing Protestant beliefs, the only objection the Catholics in chat could conjure up was completely ignoring all the quotes provided and bringing up minuscule statements from the fathers that would point to them being slightly in line with Catholicism/ Eastern Orthodoxy. With said quotes, most of which being about Mary (which some Protestants wouldn’t even necessarily disagree with), the Catholics in chat just ignored the fact that Protestant ideas did, in fact, exist in the early church, and instead claimed they were all 100% Catholic/ Eastern Orthodox, therefore magically nullifying any blatantly Protestant ideas ever being held to by the fathers.

[@SBJAY559]

Just out of curiosity my friend, what do you and other protestants think about what happened in the Paris Olympics, and how all of the power went out except for at the basilica of the Sacred Heart, which is a Catholic Church?

[@DepravedSinner]

That doesn't effect what RZ explained in this video at all. The church is the body of Christ which spreads throughout different denominations. Obviously that catholic church would be a legitimate church

[@SBJAY559]

@@DepravedSinner I agree with this statement. The body of Christ is definitely present throughout multiple and many different denominations. however some denominations are closer to the truth than others, I’m sure we can agree on that. It’s all very interesting none the less.

[@DepravedSinner]

@@SBJAY559 Most definitely

[@christopherponsford8385]

Either Protestantism is a development of doctrine, or it’s a genuine continuity of Christian tradition, and either option is problematic and difficult to prove. The latter requires an incredible amount of “squinting”, the former implies effectively a kind of Mormon “great apostasy”.

[@lukebentze4948]

So I understand the principle (at least laid out in the first 3 minutes) but I don’t understand the realities of different denominations. I talked to one of my pastors the other day- he is Reformed Baptist- and he explained how due to Scripture he disagrees strongly (yet charitably) with Presbyterians on the sacraments. I also tried to explain how if I was the only person with a Bible in my nation- and was never taught Christianity from anyone- how depending on my culture (secularistic and materialistic vs pagan and mystical) I would probably view sacraments differently. He disagreed on my with this. I don’t understand how we can look back to tradition and also say tradition can be wrong if (my interpretation) of the Bible goes against it. Any ideas?

[@lukebentze4948]

Also I understand Zoomer’s view of progressive revelation- but that thinking is what Baptists and evangelicals have to point to why the other Protestants are wrong. We just Reformed more and harder.

[@lukebentze4948]

How could the Tamrielic Empire be the Divines’ instrument for their plan on Mundus and for mankind, yet also ban Talos worship? Either Talos is not divine and therefore the Empire for hundreds of years got it wrong and was not guided by the Divines, or Talos is divine and the Empire due to apostasy has ceased to be the instrument of Akatosh and the Divines. Is Skyrim’s rebellion faithfulness to the Divines, or schism?

[@lukebentze4948]

Is Skyrim the new Empire?

[@JonBrase]

Tradition is a guide, in that it tells you what interpretations have seemed reasonable to others, and what interpretations have stood the test of time, but not an altogether reliable one, in that people, even (or perhaps especially) large groups of people can be wrong, and sometimes the only reason that an idea stands the test of time is that everybody assumes that there's a reason that it's survived so long. As far as the sacraments, whatever you believe about how they work, it is clear that they are commanded by Christ. And scripture does at least tell us something about them.

[@user-dc7im7cy4v]

I'd say that tradition should be treated with some level of weight-after all, this is a whole bunch of people who took the bible seriously who came to some conclusion-but not as seriously as what the actual texts of scripture say. In general, I treat my own theological tradition as something of a default, in that I think that, well, if these people agree with me in so much else with regard to the bible, they're probably right more likely than not in this case as well. But this isn't infallible or anything, and I'm happy to change my mind on that if convinced otherwise, if their reasoning doesn't seem to hold up. Applying this to the case you mentioned, there are a bunch of serious theologians with each of those views on the sacraments. And this is the case despite otherwise sharing a bunch of beliefs in common, and despite being aware of the views of the other side. That being the case, you have good reason to think that each side had reasons for their position worth taking seriously, looking into, and evaluating. But what ultimately matters and should determine things is what the scriptures say. All of the looking at theologians is just to help give more insight and things to consider as you go about trying your best to understand what God has revealed. Consider reading anything else. Let's say, the US constitution. If I look at what a bunch of legal experts say, well, that's probably a good default. If they're arguing over something, maybe they each have points on each sides, and I should check. If one group seems otherwise to agree with me in other contexts, maybe I should think they're more likely to be right in this context too. But what actually matters is what the document itself says.

[@BestBuddyNoivern]

13:20 The song in the background (the title is Covenanter) makes the Scotsman inside of me proud. ALBA GO BRAGH!

[@Colijgaming]

The whole argument is terrible because age is completely irrelevant to whether something is correct or not. It's fallacious.

[@unit2394]

Augustine believed you could reject your salvation. This would seem to be at odds with the Calvinist doctrine of Perseverance of the Saints.

[@Snow-8027]

Ephesians 2:8 "For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God" John 6:40 "And this is the will of him that sent me, that every one which seeth the Son, and believeth in him, may have everlasting life: and I will raise him up at the last day." John 10:28 "And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand"

[@drummersagainstitk]

You're doing a great job. Continued success.

[@benjaminschneider9147]

This makes me think about the mind problem… “If a ship goes out to sea 100 times and each time it comes back it gets repairs and wood replacements, at what point would the ship turn into a different ship. What makes something become another thing?”

[@diogomelo7897]

Intiction is still communion under both types, the discussion is not necessarily about doctrine, but more on how to administrate the sacrament, unless the sides disagree about concomitance. And the early church would still give communion under only kind in some situations, lile babies and sick people. And even in Constance where the Catholic Church had the strongest law against communion under both kinds, the church still recognized the right of the eaatern churches to give under both kinds a few years later in Florence, and gave a dispensation to the Hussites who came back, as long as they affirmed the doctrine of concomitance, which was a dividing point between them.

[@albionpetoku3844]

You saying that the early church fathers didn't all believe in the doctrines which denominations who claim to have apostolic succession like my denomination catholicism has is valid but simply cause of that it doesn't mean they weren't Catholics it's just that as you say the doctrines developed as for example the doctrine of the pope while you had the bishop of Rome in the early church not everything was known the same as now and while some didn't have every single doctrine the same as Catholics now those doctrines weren't formalized or developed yet so they could still be Catholics like I believe but it doesn't mean they were a different denomination and all other denominations originate from them also about the catholics not also drinking the wine we believe in concomitence which is the doctrine that Christ is fully present in both species of the eucharist and we believe that Christ's presence is indivisible so receiving one species of the eucharist is getting the whole sacrament and also as to why we went from getting both and now only the bread is cause of pastoral concerns like spilling the concecrated wine

[@charles21137]

“All are not created on equal terms, but some are preordained to eternal life, others to eternal damnation…” this is literally the Calvinist view of double predestination 😂

[@albionpetoku3844]

@@charles21137 the first part yes but he doesn't believe God predestines anyone to sin or hell

[@charles21137]

@@albionpetoku3844 Augustine literally said some people are preordained to eternal damnation(the quote from the other comment was from Augustine)

[@charles21137]

@@albionpetoku3844 can you show me any sources that say Augustine beloved in single predestination, because his teachings say otherwise.

[@albionpetoku3844]

@@charles21137 On the Predestination of the Saints" (Book I, Chapter 19): "For even before they were born, God knew them who were His own, and those whom He had foreknown, He predestinated to be conformed to the image of His Son. Nevertheless, there are others who, by the same mass of perdition in which the human race is condemned, do not belong to this redemption, but remain in their original state of damnation." Here he says that some are predestines some to heaven while about those who go to hell doesn't say that they get predestined as well "The City of God" (Book XII, Chapter 21), Augustine writes: "God, therefore, would in no wise have created any, whose future wickedness and future punishment He certainly foreknew, unless He had equally known to what uses in regard to the good He could turn those who should not believe and who should not obey." In this text it is indicated that while God foreknows wickedness and punishment of the reprobate, he doesn't state that god actively predestines them to damnation Instead, he emphasizes God's sovereignty and foreknowledge. His views align with single predestination more

[@LastDaysIntercessors]

A very good, needed and much overdue video. Thank you.

[@PaisiosOfGOAOA]

Quick answer no long answer no

[@bejamen14]

It’s funny you say Trent Horn wouldn’t use the argument but he does in his book “why we are Catholic”. I have a feeling he wouldn’t anymore though.

[@nh7tr]

Came here to say this. He argues in circles all the time.

[@clivejungle6999]

Ecclesials not understanding what the word ‘Reform’ in Reformation means is concerning.

[@carsonianthegreat4672]

Suan Sonna very clearly debunked Gavin Ortland on icon veneration in the early church.

[@Matti_us_Alpe]

As I a Catholic from Europe, I would like to understand why there so much hate from "American Protestants" against Catholics... "you are not Christians etc.". We do it have in Europe. In Europe I have never encounter hate from any of the Protestant denominations and irrespective of the country I was in or people I encountered.

[@legacyandlegend]

Honestly, in America, roman Catholics have always been seen as non Christians by a lot of protestants. America was founded on freedom of religion. The pilgrims who came here on the mayflower in 1620 were puritans. Roman Catholics were never seen as good Christians in the early days of the U.S. That's why the puritans came here. To escape persecution from roman Catholics. That's why they brought the geneva bible with them. It's a very calvinist bible. It's sad, honestly. Maybe if roman Catholics didn't burn so many protestants at the stake, there wouldn't be so much tension between them.

[@connorrhun]

It's okay that theology gets better over time, cos theology is not what saves us.

[@francescocantoni5665]

It wasn't just "ad fontes", it was also the culmination of a two hundreds years long process of rethinking the relationship between man and God and between man and the Scriptures. From that point of view, the Reform was inherently modern.

[@Emporerofkortoph]

The intinction point is silly

[@user-dc7im7cy4v]

The command is "drink."

[@jdfpd4002]

I have a request on craft...1775 First Baptist Chapel. Do you think you can do stain glass as well? It would be a huge project, but I would love to see it again, even with pixel boxes. Also...I love your content on church history and the differences/similarities between all branches.

[@jeannebouwman1970]

6:08 and of course it varies, if someone is coeliac they will receive only the wine and sometimes priests will give both

[@VictoriousCatholic]

Usually like your videos, but it misses one important thing: Matthew 16:18 If the church was in need of reform, purification, introduced heresy or went apostate-doesnt matter which one: just pick one-that means hell did prevail against Christs church in some sense. So who should be believed here?

[@Thatoneguy-pu8ty]

Wrong. Peter and rock are different words in the Greek. Petros= Peter Petra = rock The rock is the confession that Jesus Christ is “the son of the living God” (verse 16)

[@VictoriousCatholic]

@@Thatoneguy-pu8ty wrong. Those are Greek words. Christ would have used Aramaic so the word is Kephas or Cephas, meaning giant rock. Also, your explanation doesn't square with why Christ gave Peter the power to bind and loose or why He gave Peter keys, long standing emblems of authority (see Is 22:22)

[@Thatoneguy-pu8ty]

@@VictoriousCatholic The problem with your explanation is that the passage is written in Greek. So even though a translation might have a different meaning in a different language, it is not true to the meaning of the original text. If God wanted us to understand Peter as the rock of the church, then He would have preserved that meaning in the Greek. The idea of Peter having the keys refer to the fact that Peter will “open” the kingdom of heaven by teaching on Pentecost, thereby starting the church. Additionally, the verses in question in no way mention that Peter will have a successor, which is the claim made by the office of the Papacy.

[@VictoriousCatholic]

@@Thatoneguy-pu8ty was Greek spoken in that area or could Peter have understood Greek? No to both. Keys are symbols of authority and there is no part of Peter doing what you're claiming. Wasn't a successor to Judas chosen? Wouldnt it make sense to choose one for Peter when the time came?

[@Thatoneguy-pu8ty]

@@VictoriousCatholic yes. Biblical scholars agree that Jews were multilingual in the time of Christ. When you say there is “no part of Peter doing what you’re claiming” I assume you are stating that Peter did not preach at Pentecost, he did. It’s in Acts 2. The idea of choosing a successor for a deceased person is a stretch for supporting the Papacy.

[@blissseeker4719]

Oh and thank you for the video my brother in Christ. I love you and love all of my brethren. God bless you all! God willing we shall bear many fruits for our Lord!

[@rusbucketmartinjerabek7069]

Hi! I am a protestant Christian and a Minecraft player. I like your videos and servers for building churches and talking about Christianity. I lack Christian enviroment around me, so I would like to meet other Christians more. Even online. Can I somehow join the Minecraft server?

[@andrewengelsma277]

I was wondering this exact thing and voila

[@Elidenzer]

good question i think needs to be answered more (no views in 17 seconds, dead channel)

[@Seekingchristdaily]

Great intro

[@jonathanspeicher5298]

RZ quoting Doug Wilson? Waaat!?

[@The_bombastic_baptist31A.D]

Gavin Ortland mentioned!

[@JoWilliams-ud4eu]

Based

[@Thatoneguy-pu8ty]

ya did u see whats going on with him

[@The_bombastic_baptist31A.D]

@@Thatoneguy-pu8ty yeah

[@JoWilliams-ud4eu]

@@Thatoneguy-pu8ty it's crazy. Megan really needs to repent for openly slandering him and bearing false witness.

[@noahtylerpritchett2682]

Which is why I like Anglicanism. It's Via-Media of theology of Catholic traditions with protestant articulation or watered down interpretations and views on tradition and bible is the best.

[@legacyandlegend]

I almost became Anglo-Catholic. I ended up staying lutheran though. Anglicanism is great. I just wish there wasn't so much diversity.

[@noahtylerpritchett2682]

@@legacyandlegend hmm. The downside of all the via-"mediaing" is Anglicans middle way each other and other Protestants.

[@lad6524]

​@@noahtylerpritchett2682watered down? What do you mean by that

[@lad6524]

​@@legacyandlegenddiversity in the anglican church ?

[@noahtylerpritchett2682]

@@lad6524 Example, communion Protestants - symbol Catholics - transubstantiation, literally turns into bread and wine into flesh and blood Anglicans - magically regenerates you. Middle position

[@infotroll]

8 hour Jay after stream incoming

[@elKarlo]

But if there was nothing to protest against? I think you can take this train of bright and go very far with it.

[@DrGero15]

Protestantism? Yes. Calvinism? No. Nothing remotely like it. No one held to anything like Calvinistic Predestination before the 5th century. Well, the Gnostics did. Also the Pagans that the early church argued with.

[@pedroguimaraes6094]

Define Calvinism.

[@christsavesreadromans1096]

@@pedroguimaraes6094No one held to TULIP back then, maybe except for unconditional election.

[@DrGero15]

@@pedroguimaraes6094 Calvinist Soteriology and Sacramentality.

[@DrGero15]

@@Cattleman16479 Yes, do you?

[@spyridon7669]

Probably the biggest debate point that Orthodoxy should engage with is the idea of development of doctrine, which he's 100% in agreement with Catholicism on as he stated. Neumann was a huge dev doctrine guy. It's a really weird (or more directly, erroneous) take from an Eastern POV that theology 'improves' over time. I appreciate him delineating this because at a root level this probably is the basis of a ton of things that Protestants & Catholics believe that Orthodox reject.

[@therealong]

I would highly recommend as a must-have to buy and read *Jesus of Nazareth* 's trilogy that Pope Benedict XVI wrote during his pontificate's spare time, which he quoted: *" This book is ... my personal search 'for the face of the Lord' "* . All three books together consist of 876 pages (depending on the publishing editor groups). The first book of 374 pages, plus 22 with abbreviations, index and particularly long introduction, was completed on September 30, 2006, and first released, printed and copyrighted early in 2007. The book is steeped with Scripture passages, historical notes and several theological scholars' references. The detailed introduction explains how an indispensable tool the historical-critical method is, but adds several points the dimension and the limits of exegesis have to always keep in mind. Moreover, it makes clearly to the reader how the theological development from the 1950s onward created "a gap" between the "historical Jesus" and the "Christ of faith", as it grew wider and the two visibly fell apart. "As historical-critical scholarship advanced, it led to finer and finer distinctions between layers of tradition in the Gospels, beneath which the real object of faith --- the figure [ _Gestalt_ ] of Jesus --- became increasingly obscured and blurred. If you read a number of these reconstructions one after the other, you see at once that far from uncovering an icon that has become obscured over time, they are much more like photographs of their authors and the ideals they hold. Since then there has been growing skepticism about these portrayals of Jesus, but the figure of Jesus himself has for that very reason receded even further into the distance." As the Editors eloquently wrote on the outside loose-leaf: "In this bold, momentous work, the Pope --- in his first book written as Pope Benedict XVI --- seeks to savage the person of Jesus from recent "popular" depictions and to restore Jesus' true identity as discovered in the Gospels. Through his brilliance as a theologian and his personal conviction as a believer, the Pope shares a rich, compelling, flesh-and-blood portrait of Jesus and incites us to encounter, face-to-face, the central figure of the Christian faith."

[@Thatoneguy-pu8ty]

@@therealong when Popes were actually Catholic.

[@therealong]

@@Thatoneguy-pu8ty You are in no position to determine when popes are or aren't Catholics. The Holy See is not the Americanist US were they make popes and bishops overnight as they please. Do you have the verse I asked you to write, or not? I'm actually busy right now for exchanging nonsensical comments. Please take Christianity a little more seriously in the future if you truly believe in God.

[@Thatoneguy-pu8ty]

@@therealong Francis literally stated that humans are inherently good… How is that Catholic in any manner? How can the vicar of Christ himself deny such a basic truth? It certainly isn’t biblical- ref Romans 3. Additionally, Francis is certainly willing to excommunicate those who challenge his authority like Vigano, but permits people like Fr. Martin to openly espouse ideas that are contrary to all Christian and Catholic teaching. In light of this, it is easy to determine Francis is lacking in Catholicity. What are you taking about when you request a verse? I have never even seen your account before? Ad hom attacks don’t bolster your case…

[@Thatoneguy-pu8ty]

@@therealong Francis is no way a true Catholic. He has openly said that humans are inherently good. That statement contradicted the Churches understanding of humanity, and furthermore the Bible itself - Romans 3. He also is perfectly willing to allow people like Fr. Martin to openly espouse heretical teachings on sexuality - while he swiftly takes action against those who attempt to expose the corruption that has infiltrated the RCC like Vigano. And what are you referencing when you request a verse? I’m very confused. Additionally, ad hom attacks in no way bolster your argument.

[@Thatoneguy-pu8ty]

@@therealongFrancis is no way a true Catholic. He has openly said that humans are inherently good. That statement contradicted the Churches understanding of humanity, and furthermore the Bible itself - Romans 3. He also is perfectly willing to allow people like Fr. Martin to openly espouse heretical teachings on sexuality - while he swiftly takes action against those who attempt to expose the corruption that has infiltrated the RCC like Vigano. And what are you referencing when you request a verse?

[@tysamurai6036]

I personally have always found an extremely lovely beauty of the three pronged church traditions: a triple braided cord is not easily broken. Eastern/oriental Orthodox, Catholic, Protestant. Each one has their own set of drawbacks and advantages. As long as we are wrapped around that beautiful Vine that is Jesus, and holding to the Scripture, and applying it to our lives, we can wrap around each other and band up together against the evil in this world.

[@Thatoneguy-pu8ty]

@@tysamurai6036 I like this take. Sad part is two of the three cast the others out.

[@Arete312]

No

[@user-lg9im7if3y]

“I’m not trying to win arguments here” oh don’t worry redeemed… because you won’t, “Protestantism existed in the early church” LOL ok bro… “try to argue yourself out of heresy on the solas in the early church” Challenge rating: impossible

[@elKarlo]

But for the rabbinical argument, they actually formulated the post 2nd temple Judism after Christianity was a thing. One could argue it was in reaction to Christianity. While the old church did make the Bible and their interpretation was not in response to Protestants.

[@bobsbobbs]

it was in reaction to the destruction of the second temple

[@ancient_music]

Wait, Calvinism? The way Calvin understood predestination is definitely not in line with the Early Church or Scripture really! The traditional understanding of predestination, especially before and outside of Calvin's influence, often emphasized God’s foreknowledge rather than a deterministic decree. The traditional view, held by many early church fathers like Origen, Justin Martyr, and even Augustine in his earlier writings, posits that God predestines individuals based on His foreknowledge of how they will respond to His grace. God, being omniscient, knows the future choices of every individual-whether they will accept or reject the Gospel-and His election is seen as a response to this knowledge, not an arbitrary decree. Calvin’s teaching on predestination was seen as radical and controversial, even among some Reformers, because it appeared to undermine human responsibility and free will. Many branches of Protestantism later re-emphasized a synergistic understanding of salvation and returned to the idea of conditional election based on God’s foreknowledge.

[@ancient_music]

So IDK, there's one example of the Reformation in reality dirtying that same snowball up.

[@CadenSmith-kz2nn]

Thanks for this video! This was a good topic to know more about

[@davidrobinson7260]

Comment for the algorithm 👍👍video was exceptional this time

[@spyridon7669]

Orthodoxy doesn't do intinction. That's a trad Catholic thing.

[@Melancholian]

What is intinction

[@AlexAlex-ij3mz]

If protestantism purified things then why are there so many denominations?

[@mamiller1980]

Church doesn't mean all of the people who believe in Christ. Its root is ekklesia, to gather together. Being in schism and separating from the actual Church while still saying your part of the Christ's Church is falso. Instead of a gathering, you've created a separation.

[@brianwhite2104]

How do the Waldenses fit in with your view of church history?

[@UnashamedofJesus]

Great video brother! God bless!

[@Felix67462]

YO REDEEMED ZOOMER 🔥🔥🔥

[@emilyfs2012]

Where do reformed find their view of Lord's Supper in church history? We've looked so hard and can't find it. I can find pretty much everything else but not this. It seems like the father's were pretty unanimous about real presence in the elements which seems pretty problematic for reformed. In a reformed church now trying to stay there.

[@legacyandlegend]

Spiritual presence was invested by calvinists. Real presence was always the view of the early church. Even Martin Luther believed in real presence. You're better off lutheran.

[@balanjayf9368]

The short answer is no, but the long answer is: well, if you kind of think that I’m right, then maybe some guy sort of looked slightly less Catholic once…

[@jonathanVA44]

There are some Baptists who don't want to call Mary "the mother of God" - I don't know where they're getting that...... urrrr, because Mary is not the mother of a nature, but of a person. We do not call her "mother of man" either...because Christ is not just man, but God and man together. That's right, Christ is not only God, and Mary is not the mother merely of God, but of the whole person of Christ.

[@Procopius464]

I see the Lutheran- RC split as being a form of mitosis.

[@BasiliscBaz]

Honestly, nestorians and arians existed before so 😂😂😂 just kidding (i am serious about you baptists and americans evangelicals!!!)

[@Thatoneguy-pu8ty]

bro has no clue what Arianism or Nestorianism even entails

[@leullakew9579]

The thing is the Church of the East (Nestorians) aren’t actually as bad as people say it is.

[@BasiliscBaz]

@@leullakew9579 i meant actual nestorians aka anabaptists

[@leullakew9579]

@@BasiliscBaz Anabaptists are no where near Nestorian.

[@BasiliscBaz]

@@leullakew9579 🤣 even if i was wrong they still dare to de(f)(n)y sacraments of church, founded by Son of God

[@Frazier16]

If the bible is thr only infallible authority, whos interpretation is infallible? Because people interrupt the bible in many ways

[@thebenzaga]

Yes many people « interrupt » the bible

[@Theophoruz]

Considering how the Church discerned whether the Canon was apostolic teaching. They must also use apostolic teaching to properly interpret the Bible as well as discern whether it is apostolic.

[@legacyandlegend]

No one. All humans are fallible. No one is capable of 100 percent properly interpreting scripture.

[@thebenzaga]

@@legacyandlegend Si on prend votre logique à son conclusion, même la bible n’est pas inspirée par l’esprit sainte parce que les hommes étaient ceux qui l’avaient écrit. Si les hommes son toujours faillible, même les Apôtres étaient faillible quand ils écrivaient les écritures saintes. Donc c’est nécessaire que des exceptions existent. T’as besoin d’être cohérent dans votre raisonnement.

[@TheSignofJonah777]

@@legacyandlegendyes we rely on the spirit for that.

[@williamnathanael412]

I love the analogy between Protestantism-Chalcedon and Christianity-OT Religion. Except it doesn't work against marcionites.

[@viresin21]

Yes, they were called Heretics and were dealt with by early church fathers accordingly.

[@smashers2060]

Catholics don't offer both forms of communion? All the churches I've been to have offered both. You have the choice to only take the bread, but both were always offered.

[@sub.sa.3058]

I have a question, since you have studied Christianity for so long, I have been wondering for a while, Can I study other religions and mythologies if I am a christian? If so, how would that work? * I ask since the first, second and third commandments and all that

[@TheSignofJonah777]

Yes you can brother. So that we may answer their questions. But know your own religion first.

[@therealong]

Education is bliss... 😇

[@sub.sa.3058]

@@therealong more like masochism, but sure lol

[@therealong]

@@sub.sa.3058 I can't tell by so little you've said what you meant with *studying* other religions. Studying other belief systems should not necessarily lead to abandon or repudiate one's own faith, especially the Christian one, but could instead fortify your own and make you rather critical to rather start studying your own better. When you wrote about the commandments, especially mentioning the first one, it doesn't certainly forbid one to have *knowledge* of other religions. The commandment only states and remind to be faithful to your God there, and it is addressed to His chosen people of Israel, does it not? Jesus knew well what the Torah and the Prophets implied, didn't he? There only is ONE God, thus if other religions still pray to an unknown God who still is the Supreme Being and Creator of everything, there are good chances that they also glimpse some rays of truth, as a document called *_Nostra Aetate_* makes it clear. Why did you associate acquiring *knowledge* with "masochism"? The only thing it comes to mind is that studying requires a lot of time and patience from one, as also will and effort. PAX CHRISTI 😇

[@fabulouschild2005]

The Moravian Church were technically Protestant before Protestantism was made cool by Luther. Kinda same with the Oriental Orthodox churches

[@Thatoneguy-pu8ty]

Apostolic succession means nothing if your church doesn't align with apostolic teaching (the infallible word of God aka the Bible).

[@jdotoz]

@@Thatoneguy-pu8ty Scripture doesn't contain all of Apostolic teachings. Scripture even says so.

[@TheSignofJonah777]

@@jdotozand did you hear RZ say the Bible isn’t our only authority😂

[@Thatoneguy-pu8ty]

@@bikesrcool_1958 Three self patriotic movement Stan 🫡

[@christsavesreadromans1096]

My church does align with apostolic teaching, like professing that baptism saves (1 Peter 3:21), just as scripture does.

[@TheSignofJonah777]

@@christsavesreadromans1096 It never says it saves. Rather it says. Not as a removal of dirt from the body, but as an appeal to God for good conscience. Why didn't peter just say Not as a removal of dirt from the body, but as a removal of sins from the soul?

[@esportsdrive9314]

dont you think youre spend to much time on whos right rather than practicing your faith ?

[@legacyandlegend]

James 5:19-20 says if you see someone wandering from the truth to try to bring them back. That is practicing your faith.

[@Dsingis]

Hey Zoomer. I'm sure you've heard of Mar Mari Emmanuel, one of those christians famous on TikTok and youtube. I'd love if you made a video about him. I'm curious as to what his profession of faith is. He seems to be affiliated with the Assyrian Church of the East, but was excommunicated alledgedly for disagreeing with parts of Nicea and split off to found his own Church. I can't really find any profession of faith, or what Creeds they uphold online. Maybe you have more luck with that?

[@Ice_t_ly-ku]

Catholicism's reasoning "Modeling OT Customs & Early Church(Apostolic succession) traditions" Funny enough, we've entered into the same circle, deviating from sound traditions of God, adding onto salvation, and claiming "muh EaRly FaRtheRs" even though Jesus specifically said call no one Father or "assign them that title", for you only have 1 Father, and He is in heaven; unless your real father is Satan.

[@Songmyz]

Silly argument. Do you call your dad, father? Protestantism is what you ascribed to the Catholic Church. There is no doctrinal unity amongst the Protestants and you get hundreds of different denominations with different interpretations and theology. Jesus said the gates of Hell won't prevail against the Church. There is only one Church truly united for 2,000 years since the Great Commission in 33 AD -- it is the Catholic Church.

[@Melancholian]

Earliest protestants were the waldensians 1100s

[@balanjayf9368]

The branch theory lends credence to many heretical denominations. There are no branches, just breaks.

[@KevinPJoseph]

Hey Zoomer, I absolutely loved the background tone you used for this video! Could you please tell me the names of it?

[@JankumChan]

Here i recommend if you want to further clarify on the ipic to make a chart of sorts where early church fathers lie with their positions on theology

[@Dr_suter]

Will this affect the Fortnite servers?

[@TheSignofJonah777]

Yes

[@Dr_suter]

@@TheSignofJonah777 🥲