Why I and this Eastern Orthodox apologist aren’t Protestant

[@viviennedunbar3374]

As someone from a European culture now living in the USA for 25+ years, American Evangelicals don't appreciate how so much of the way they practice Christianity is extremely culturally American. I appreciate the genuine love of Jesus and the Trinity that America Evangelicals have but you go back to the countries where the birth of Christianity happened around the Eastern Mediterranean and the ancient Churches there are absolutely nothing like an American Evangelical service, while a devout American Catholic will recognize the liturgy and understand what is happening. In fact I can go into a Catholic Church all over the world and be right at home and know we share theology and are unified. I am an convert for many decades from agnosticism. American Evangelical culture leaves me cold, its not universal its highly influenced by secular culture and is constantly splitting and producing new Churches, its just chaotic. The ancient Churches that stem from the ancient Great Church are consistent and have lived the gospel for 2 thousand years. Despite our sinfulness Jesus constantly redeems us.

[@tedperkoski7534]

This is a refreshing change from a lot of the stuff that is on KZbin. You are building up each others faiths but you are mindful and respectful of each other's point of view. Please do this more often.

[@judyswiderski2682]

Most importantly, Where is the truth? Would replacing.the truth with lies disqualify? Which? Thou shalt not murder? Thou shalt no kill? Knowing that the Ten Command- ments are addressing man's relationship with God and man's relationship with man, see what God says. Thou shalt not murder, Exodus 20:13 and Deuteronomy 5:7. Murder would seem to be correct for it is written, "Whoso sheddeth man's blood, by man shall his blood be shed: for in the image of God made he man." Genesis 9:6. Yet, the command goes deeper. What about the accidental killing of someone? In Joshua if any kills another unawares and unwillingly, and hated him not (Joshua 29:3, Deuteronomy 4:4) a person could run to a city of refuge and not die at the hands of the avenger of blood. (Joshua 20:9). If the person is found not guilty of murder, that person is not able to return to his field to work it. He must remain in the city to protect himself from the avenger of blood.(Numbers 35:27 to 32). Clearly, God places great value on each person. Also: The bible has been changed. Did God say? Come on, really? God said He preserved His word. Psalm 12:6-7. Most modern bibles do not. In other words they are not admitting that God has a standard, His inspired word. His word is quick (alive) and quickens (gives life). His word is eternal. Most of the modern bibles have at least one out and out lie. NKJB lies in Exodus 6:3. They began to call on the name of the Lord in Genesis 4:26. Others quote Jesus telling his brothers, i am not going to the feast. John 7:8. (Is he saying he is going to break the law of Moses?) He waits and then goes. Liar! BLASPHEMY . Jesus simply said, not going now, not yet. He waits and then goes. No problem, no lie. And blatantly they mock Jesus and unashamedly, constantly, with each change ask, Did God say? Did God say Mark 11:26? Absolutely. It is an essential part of our walk with God. A verse that makes us tremble was added????? Did God say? Acts 15:34? It shows God's divine providence. Silas was there when Paul needed him for a journey. Obviously Silas remained there. BRAZENLY, they change or remove a word that gives the believers true power! Matthew 12:31 and Mark 9:29! Some spiritual warfare needs prayer and fasting! Did God say eleven (11) times in the New Testament the word damnation, eternal burning? Yes. But not in theirs! Did God say? Did God give three witnesses to that truth? Mark 9:44, 46, 48. They however only have v48. The other two they ask, Did God say? This is important because we need to know the truth and those who preach Annialism, we cease to exist, are easily proven wrong with these verses. Jesus is God and Jesus is Man. Hebrews supports this with four verses, 3:3, 7:24, 8:3 and 10:12: "But this man, after he had offered one sacrifice for sin for ever, sat down at rhe right hand of God; v10:12. They do not use the clarifying words 'this man' at all. Again, Did God say? Every change they make is an insult to God and His word. God said He would curse those who add to or take from His word. Revelation 22:18-19. In the Old Testament those who honored a false prophet received the reward of that prophet. So the Alexandrian translators, the bible societies the publishers, the promoters, sellers and those who teach from them (showing those ear tickling bibles as God's word) or honor them will be held responsible. If done ignorantly, repent. God will not be mocked. This happened when the inspired Antioch manuscripts called the Textus Receptus were replaced by the Alexandrian manuscripts called the Codex B or the Vaticanus from the Vatican basement, and the Sianiticus from a monestary. They do not agree with each other and the latter has about 30 changes per page. Obviously inspired by their spiritual father who brings conflict, frustration, despair and DOUBT. King James Bible online Helpful tool: Noah Webster 1828 Dictionary online: Look up: REPENT, REGENERATION, BELIEVE, FAITH, REDEMPTION, PERFECT, CONVERSATION, PREVENT, PROPITIATION etc. Suppliers: Churchkjb.com Localchurchbiblepublishers.com Sources: Adullum Films Documentary -Tares Among the Wheat video Books: The Revision Revised and The Last Twelve Verses of Mark, both by William Burgon. Dean Burgon lived during the time of Wescott and Hort. Book: Look What's Missing by David Daniels Chick.com. If interested an old video called The Forbidden Book video. It has some American History also.

[@MrPanchoak]

Unfortunately that sentiment also goes the other way. I absolutely hate that fact. But when we listen to many Catholic opponents to Orthodoxy we find a rather vitriolic attitude. Even from my own favorite polemists. Of which there are several. I never even think badly of the Church. Yes certain Popes and individual leaders are rotten. But who can honestly find fault with Padre Pio, Mother Teresa, and so many other prominent Roman Catholic Saints. I dare anyone Catholic, Orthodox, OR Protestant. To live more virtuously than any of these. I pray the Lord's blessings on all Catholics. Roman OR Orthodox.

[@asevelel]

This is the ONLY Orthodox Christian I have ever witnessed to not have an attitude problem and actually seems honest and genuine. I am entirely convinced the Catholic Church is the true Church but if anyone has anymore good Orthodox content for me I will happily consume it so I can learn more about the Orthodox perspective from honest and humble people.

[@asevelel]

@a Thanks. I am somewhat familiar with him but one video I have seen of him gave me the same impression I spoke of... but maybe I should give him another chance and not discredit him based on that one instance.

[@nomen6]

Lol why do I smell a lingering Jay Dyre behind this post 😂

[@theejungianstoic7424]

Jay Dyer is the best

[@theejungianstoic7424]

@@asevelel It sounds like you can't handle the truth, and just because you don't like how someone comes across, doesn't mean they're wrong. BETA!!!

[@NGAOPC]

I haven’t surveyed his material, but in virtually every engagement I’ve had with orthodox, it was with converts, and at that exactly in the manner Horn has accounted about so many Protestant apologetics sounding like atheist arguments; from their disbeliefs, negations accumulated over their spiritual walk, speaking from what they don’t believe to explain who they are “in essence”, and thus poorly representing who they ARE, as even Catholicism contends (that they ARE licit Christianity with validity Sacraments etc). As a Byzantine Catholic, I’ve seen and participated in enough that was propounded by convertodox as “definitively/distinctly” Orthodox that…was not, and in exploration found most born/well-formed Orthodox clergy and scholars also did not hold as definitive or exclusive. It’s refreshing to see a representative who does not have “convertitis”, as Orthodox themselves call it.

[@ProjectMysticApostolate]

I will always be Catholic because of 1. Apostolic Succession 2. Teaching Magisterium 3. The Sacraments. Also Jesus said "the gates of hell will not prevail against it", 2000 years and counting. That's a pretty good indicator to me. Singing christian songs, listening to platitudes, closing your eyes and reaching emotional euphoria isn't real church going. The Novus Ordo and TLM in both forms is. Thanks for all your work Trent. God bless you.

[@jessebryant9233]

What is missing? The Bible. And Jesus wasn't talking about the hierarchical organization that calls itself "Catholic" that teaches so many unbiblical, extra-biblical, and heretical things. Such teachings are horrible indicators if you ask me.

[@crobeastness]

@@jessebryant9233 the bible is in all of Christianity. He mentioned things that are separators between Catholicism and protestantism. The Bible is a Catholic book. Of course there is a hierarchy. He specifically made 12 apostles and singled out 1 of them.

[@crobeastness]

What about the eastern Catholic masses? I sometimes go to a Byzantine liturgy.

[@ProjectMysticApostolate]

@@jessebryant9233 there is no part in the Bible that says Jesus left us a book. He in His great wisdom left us an institution which developed throughout history and eventually produced what Christianity calls the "Bible" today. If you search Pope Damasus, St. Jerome, the Councils of Rome, Hippo and Carthage. It clearly shows that the Catholic Church pre-existed the bible and through the guidance of the Holy Spirit, produced the canon of scripture we know today. It was only 1500 into the Church's existence when Martin Luther changed his canon from 73 books to 66.

[@ProjectMysticApostolate]

@@crobeastness That is clearly Catholic and not to mention their aesthetics are so appealing to the intellect. As long as the church you attend is in communion with the Church, your liturgy is most likely valid. We know that there are parts of the world that have kept their spiritual tradition that are not necessarily TLM or Novus Ordo. Coptic Churches come to mind.. Thank you for pointing it out.

[@lisaherrling6880]

Last September I had my gall bladder removed. The day before surgery, my priest gave me Anointing of the Sick. It was a real blessing and a beautiful sacrament. Fr. Peter said he would like more people receive it.

[@judyswiderski2682]

Where does he say that?

[@glof2553]

"Amen, amen, I say to you: you are saved by faith alone, and scripture alone has told you this. You will be in error for about 1500 years." Accretions 1:1

[@TruePT]

😆😆

[@tafazzi-on-discord]

This is now my new discord bio

[@glof2553]

@YAJUN YUAN baptismal regeneration is not an accretion

[@councilofflorence4896]

@YAJUN YUAN Baptismal Regeneration is perhaps one of the single most well attested teachings in the early Churvh, dating to its infancy. Not an accretion.

[@HolyKhaaaaan]

@YAJUN YUAN See you're still a little salty from the salt you ate for your infant baptism.

[@huskydragon2000]

Hello Trent. I just wanted to say that ever since I read your book, "The Case for Catholicism" I just can't accept Protestantism anymore. I also liked your discussions on "how protestants argue like atheists." I used to be an atheist but converted back to Christianity in early 2021. I just assumed the protestant doctrine was default. But ever since watching that discussion I couldn't help but realize that I did place a high burden of proof on Catholicism which I just didn't with Protestantism. Thank you for helping me think better about my relationship with Christ and understand doctrine better. At this time I would say that I'm just leaning heavily towards Catholicism but wouldn't consider myself a Catholic yet (I've still got to be baptized and get my first communion).

[@judyswiderski2682]

Philadelphia Collins, Continue to study their version of Christianity and certainly you will be won over. Jesus tells us where to start. "Jesus answered, Verily, verily I say unto thee, Except a man be born of the water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God. That which is born of the flesh is flesh and he that is born of the Spirit is spirit." John 3:5-6. "But the hour cometh and now is when the true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit and in truth: for the Father seeketh such to worship him. God is Spirit: and they that worship him must worship in spirit and in truth." John 4:23-24. In Roman Catholicism you walk in the flesh of rules and traditions. Approach God as He likes to be approached. SALVATION IS A HEART ISSUE! Many believe that they are saved because they said the sinners prayer. Yet, "The heart is deceptive above all things and desperately wicked, who can know it?" Jeremiah 17:9. That prayer may be from Arminianism which states that man can save himself by his free will. Calvinists say that God chooses and who can resist the Holy Spirit? Stephen told his persecutors that they do always resist the Holy Ghost. Acts 7:51. Scripture says, " The LORD is nigh unto them that are of a broken heart and saveth them that be of a contrite spirit. Psalm 34:18, Isaiah 57:!5, 66:2. Ask God to send the Holy Ghost to you, Luke 11:13. He will gently bring your sins to mind. This will be painful because pride hates it! As they come to mind, confess them to Jesus. Persevere. "Awake thou that sleepest, and arise from the dead, and Christ shall give thee light." Ephesians 5:14. WHEN you see your desperate need for a sinless Saviour, CRY OUT to Jesus to save you. That is His desire. Then call upon the name of the Lord. How? As Peter told the Jews who were pricked in the heart. Acts 2:38 and as Paul did. Acts 22:16. They were baptized, calling on the name of the Lord. "Jesus answered and said, Verily, verily I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God. " John 3:5. John's water baptism included the confessing of sins. Mark 1:1-5. Proverbs 28:13. Jesus baptizes with the Holy Ghost. Luke 3:16. Meditate on Romans 6:3-11 and Colossians 2:6-14, Matthew 28:19-20, 1 Corinthians 12:12-14. King James Bible on line. Helpful tool: Noah Webster 1828 Dictionary on line. Read the King James Bible taken from the inspired Antioch manuscripts. Man does not live by bread alone but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of the LORD doth man live. Deuteronomy 8:3, Matthew 4:4 and Luke 4:4. The inspired word of God instructs in righteousness 2 Timothy 3:16. It quickens (gives life). Hebrews 4:12. It shows the way of righteousness unto holiness. 2 Peter 1:2-11. Peter wrote to the Jews and non Jews. To those Paul ministered to. Modern translations continually asks, Did God say??? Did he say, Mark 11:26? Yes.it is imperative to our walk with God. Did God say, Acts 15:34??? How do they have the nerve to ask? It showed God's divine providence. Paul would needed Silas. Throw those Babylonian god inspired books out? YOU CANNOT DRINK THE CUP OF THE LORD AND THE CUP OF THE DEVILS. 1 Corinthians 10:21.Jesus must be your first love. Revelation 2:1-5. To put men or a man above Jesus is BLASPHEMY.

[@churomonster]

Praying for your conversion

[@johnobeid67]

Oh Lord, please grant unity to your Apostolic Church (Catholic and Orthodox). One thousand years of separation and pain has been long enough.

[@cyriljorge986]

There's zero chance of unity without accepting Orthodoxy. Watch Jay Dyer's latest 4-hour video answering Trent Horn's mistakes.

[@johnobeid67]

@@cyriljorge986 thanks. I will listen to the Jay Dyer video. As to reunion, you may be right on that point, but our separation remains a scandal and an open wound in the body of Christ. I suspect He is very angry that we are not in communion (given that He specifically prayed that His followers would remain one, just as He and the Father are One). I think you are partially correct - Catholics would need to accept Orthodoxy, but I think Orthodox also need to accept Catholicism. Remember that for the first 1000 years, the word Catholic meant Orthodox and vice versa. So, we need to accept each other.

[@cyriljorge986]

@@johnobeid67 Four hours is a lot-- but it's wholly and completely worth it. If the entertainment-style isn't your thing, pursuing the references to Ubi Petrus's work is worthwhile when it comes to youtube lectures. And no, there are no wounds in the Body of Christ, there is exactly one Body, the canonical Orthodox communion. And no, Orthodoxy not only will not, but *cannot* accept Romanist heresy. God is not angry with Christians for following Christianity, but he weeps for schismatics and heretics. Roman Catholics are one of a long list: Arians, Apollinarians, Donatists, Montanists, Monophysites, etc. All devoid of grace. The church is *whole*, and it is true, one, holy, Catholic, and apostolic! Please, visit an Orthodox Divine Liturgy and see for yourself, most importantly of all.

[@johnobeid67]

@@cyriljorge986 I love the Divine Liturgy very much, and I love my Orthodox brethren very much too. Obviously I disagree with you regarding the Catholic Church, especially your lumping us together with Arians, Monophysites etc. Our Christology alone should help you to see the differences there, even if you don’t accept anything else. Regarding your claim that the Orthodox Church is one and undivided - I cannot accept this having seen what is going on between the Moscow patriarchate and the Constantinople patriarchate. This is a deep severance in the church. In no way can Orthodoxy be considered as the one holy Catholic and apostolic church when you have a full in schism going on. There is also a lot to be concerned about with Orthodox moral teaching on things like divorce and contraception etc. Then there is the issue of the lack of an authority structure such as the Pope to sort out certain issues.

[@cyriljorge986]

@@johnobeid67 Heretical groups are heretical; not all those groups mentioned erred in Christology per se, anyway. As for Moscow and Constantinople, a small study of church history makes it very clear this has happened more than 100 times throughout the 2000 year history of Orthodoxy. Bishops are *not* infallible, contrary to Roman Catholic (V1) "infallible" dogma, and these sorts of breaks happened as early as the 1st century and in every single proceeding century (yes, even before the schism). There is no deep severance, just a political break of communion. When all Orthodox bodies break communion, that is when the offending party loses grace. Ubi Petrus absolutely deflates that Roman Catholic trope about divorce and contraception in his elegantly presented lectures-- but it's another thing where a study of church history would help you find clarity! I know you haven't read into it (I didn't either as a Roman Catholic), but again, this is another area where Orthodoxy is in line with the church of the first 1000 years and Roman Catholicism is not. Please, check out the two relevant Ubi Petrus lectures as well. I was less kind and more ignorant than you when I was a Roman Catholic, so please know that I don't fault you for much of anything. Please, do the work and learn where you are misinformed! You need the sacraments, you need membership in the Ark of Salvation! God bless you.

[@robertopacheco2997]

I'm an academic historian, not a church historian, biblical exegete, or systematic theologian. I don't care for sectarian proof-texting one way or the other. I just have a simple question: has the Bible alone actually ever settled a theological debate in church history? Did the Bible alone settle the dispute in Acts 15? What about at Nicaea or at any of the other ecumenical councils? Did the Bible alone settle the debate between von Eck and Luther at Leipzig? Or between Luther and Zwingli at Marburg? Did the Bible alone definitively resolve the dispute between Calvin and Arminius on predestination vs. free will? Or between Zwingli and the Anabaptists on paedobaptism? How has sola scriptura fared in debates between and among so-called "Primitivists" and "Restorationists" and their many and sundry disagreements on everything from soteriology to ecclesiology? More recently, did the Bible alone resolve the disagreements between John MacArthur and Zane Hodges on the matter of "Lordship Salvation"? On the other hand, the examples of the Bible alone actually serving as the cause for schism throughout church history are too many to list here.

[@judyswiderski2682]

@Raberto Pacheco, Is the problem with the living word of God or the acceptance of lying bibles as truth? Modern bibles continued challenge God and His word bu asking, Did God say? Come on, really? God said He preserved His word. Psalm 12:6-7. Most modern bibles do not. In other words they are not admitting that God has a standard, His inspired word. His word is quick (alive) and quickens (gives life). His word is eternal. Most of the modern bibles have at least one out and out lie. NKJB lies in Exodus 6:3. They began to call on the name of the Lord in Genesis 4:26. Others quote Jesus telling his brothers, i am not going to the feast. John 7:8. (Is he saying he is going to break the law of Moses?) He waits and then goes. Liar! BLASPHEMY . Jesus simply said, not going now, not yet. He waits and then goes. No problem, no lie. And blatantly they mock Jesus and unashamedly, constantly, with each change ask, Did God say? Did God say Mark 11:26? Absolutely. It is an essential part of our walk with God. A verse that makes us tremble was added????? Did God say? Acts 15:34? It shows God's divine providence. Silas was there when Paul needed him for a journey. Obviously Silas remained there. BRAZENLY, they change or remove a word that gives the believers true power! Matthew 12:31 and Mark 9:29! Some spiritual warfare needs prayer and fasting! Did God say eleven (11) times in the New Testament the word damnation, eternal burning? Yes. But not in theirs! Did God say? Did God give three witnesses to that truth? Mark 9:44, 46, 48. They however only have v48. The other two they ask, Did God say? This is important because we need to know the truth and those who preach Annialism, we cease to exist, are easily proven wrong with these verses. Jesus is God and Jesus is Man. Hebrews supports this with four verses, 3:3, 7:24, 8:3 and 10:12: "But this man, after he had offered one sacrifice for sin for ever, sat down at rhe right hand of God; v10:12. They do not use the clarifying words 'this man' at all. Again, Did God say? Every change they make is an insult to God and His word. God said He would curse those who add to or take from His word. Revelation 22:18-19. In the Old Testament those who honored a false prophet received the reward of that prophet. So the Alexandrian translators, the bible societies the publishers, the promoters, sellers and those who teach from them (showing those ear tickling bibles as God's word) or honor them will be held responsible. If done ignorantly, repent. God will not be mocked. This happened when the inspired Antioch manuscripts called the Textus Receptus were replaced by the Alexandrian manuscripts called the Codex B or the Vaticanus from the Vatican basement, and the Sianiticus from a monestary. They do not agree with each other and the latter has about 30 changes per page. Obviously inspired by their spiritual father who brings conflict, frustration, despair and DOUBT. King James Bible online Helpful tool: Noah Webster 1828 Dictionary online: Look up: REPENT, REGENERATION, BELIEVE, FAITH, REDEMPTION, PERFECT, CONVERSATION, PREVENT, PROPITIATION etc. Suppliers: Churchkjb.com Localchurchbiblepublishers.com Sources: Adullum Films Documentary -Tares Among the Wheat video Books: The Revision Revised and The Last Twelve Verses of Mark, both by William Burgon. Dean Burgon lived during the time of Wescott and Hort. Book: Look What's Missing by David Daniels Chick.com. If interested an old video called The Forbidden Book video. It has some American History also. Is the obvious lying bible a problem or is it the failure of the man to repent?

[@jotunman627]

Bible was not accessible to common man for more than 1500 years of church history. besides man was illiterate for the same amount of time. People forget that mass literacy is a recent phenomenon.

[@judyswiderski2682]

@@jotunman627 That is only true according to your Roman Catholic history. We all know the victor writes history. Many Christians lived during the time of Constantine. Those who would not join his Church/State were martyred. He martyred many. You are right about those under Roman rule. They were uneducated and more easily manipulated and subject to the church.

[@judyswiderski2682]

Can lying bibles settle anything??? The bible has been changed. Did God say? Come on, really? God said He preserved His word. Psalm 12:6-7. Most modern bibles do not. In other words they are not admitting that God has a standard, His inspired word. His word is quick (alive) and quickens (gives life). His word is eternal. Most of the modern bibles have at least one out and out lie. NKJB lies in Exodus 6:3. They began to call on the name of the Lord in Genesis 4:26. Others quote Jesus telling his brothers, i am not going to the feast. John 7:8. (Is he saying he is going to break the law of Moses?) He waits and then goes. Liar! BLASPHEMY . Jesus simply said, not going now, not yet. He waits and then goes. No problem, no lie. And blatantly they mock Jesus and unashamedly, constantly, with each change ask, Did God say? Did God say Mark 11:26? Absolutely. It is an essential part of our walk with God. A verse that makes us tremble was added????? Did God say? Acts 15:34? It shows God's divine providence. Silas was there when Paul needed him for a journey. Obviously Silas remained there. BRAZENLY, they change or remove a word that gives the believers true power! Matthew 12:31 and Mark 9:29! Some spiritual warfare needs prayer and fasting! Did God say eleven (11) times in the New Testament the word damnation, eternal burning? Yes. But not in theirs! Did God say? Did God give three witnesses to that truth? Mark 9:44, 46, 48. They however only have v48. The other two they ask, Did God say? This is important because we need to know the truth and those who preach Annialism, we cease to exist, are easily proven wrong with these verses. Jesus is God and Jesus is Man. Hebrews supports this with four verses, 3:3, 7:24, 8:3 and 10:12: "But this man, after he had offered one sacrifice for sin for ever, sat down at rhe right hand of God; v10:12. They do not use the clarifying words 'this man' at all. Again, Did God say? Every change they make is an insult to God and His word. God said He would curse those who add to or take from His word. Revelation 22:18-19. In the Old Testament those who honored a false prophet received the reward of that prophet. So the Alexandrian translators, the bible societies the publishers, the promoters, sellers and those who teach from them (showing those ear tickling bibles as God's word) or honor them will be held responsible. If done ignorantly, repent. God will not be mocked. This happened when the inspired Antioch manuscripts called the Textus Receptus were replaced by the Alexandrian manuscripts called the Codex B or the Vaticanus from the Vatican basement, and the Sianiticus from a monestary. They do not agree with each other and the latter has about 30 changes per page. Obviously inspired by their spiritual father who brings conflict, frustration, despair and DOUBT. King James Bible online Helpful tool: Noah Webster 1828 Dictionary online: Look up: REPENT, REGENERATION, BELIEVE, FAITH, REDEMPTION, PERFECT, CONVERSATION, PREVENT, PROPITIATION etc. Suppliers: Churchkjb.com Localchurchbiblepublishers.com Sources: Adullum Films Documentary -Tares Among the Wheat video Books: The Revision Revised and The Last Twelve Verses of Mark, both by William Burgon. Dean Burgon lived during the time of Wescott and Hort. Book: Look What's Missing by David Daniels Chick.com. If interested an old video called The Forbidden Book video. It has some American History also.

[@judyswiderski2682]

Consider this. Which is true? Which? Thou shalt not murder? Thou shalt no kill? Knowing that the Ten Command- ments are addressing man's relationship with God and man's relationship with man, see what God says. Thou shalt not murder, Exodus 20:13 and Deuteronomy 5:7. Murder would seem to be correct for it is written, "Whoso sheddeth man's blood, by man shall his blood be shed: for in the image of God made he man." Genesis 9:6. Yet, the command goes deeper. What about the accidental killing of someone? In Joshua if any kills another unawares and unwillingly, and hated him not (Joshua 29:3, Deuteronomy 4:4) a person could run to a city of refuge and not die at the hands of the avenger of blood. (Joshua 20:9). If the person is found not guilty of murder, that person is not able to return to his field to work it. He must remain in the city to protect himself from the avenger of blood.(Numbers 35:27 to 32). Clearly, God places great value on each person.

[@frerfresh8373]

Man, as a former Baptist going through RCIA, I have so much love and respect for the Orthodox. I hope and pray for the healing of all schisms, but especially the one between them and Rome. It seems sometimes like they are soooo close, even though know that's not the case. One day. Come, Lord Jesus, come!

[@andysedlak1534]

Actually Eastern Orthodox and Roman Catholic are VERY similar.

[@cheechak481]

How did you get past the excessive veneration/worship of Mary? Have been Catholic for all my life...76 years and still don't get it. The rosary is not part of my faith, nor are private revelations such as Fatima, Guadalupe etc... the Catholic church teaching is that we are not required to accept or believe in them, though one is considered to not be on the team by the Mary crowd, if we don't believe in them. Mariology1 kzbin.info/www/bejne/a37Omo2fqamahJY Mariology 2kzbin.info/www/bejne/e4bCipZoiLlqptE Critique of Orthodox theology kzbin.info/www/bejne/fKWXoWWea8uHha8

[@djo-dji6018]

Great conversation, hopefully we'll see the two of you together again.

[@hanmirz4803]

A convert to the Catholic faith here. Best decision in my life. To all, pray the Rosary daily.

[@roseg1333]

Welcome! We are so glad you are here ❤️🕊🙏🏼

[@bobdobbs943]

Mary will save you.

[@roseg1333]

@@bobdobbs943 don’t be rude

[@bobdobbs943]

@@roseg1333 Well wont she?

[@roseg1333]

@@bobdobbs943 what are you talking about?

[@sammig.8286]

The whole issue of schism was one thing that drew me to the Catholic faith; although at the time I didn't know it by the word "schism". I was convicted by what the Bible teaches about avoiding a person who causes division. At the time, I was not permitted to join the Baptist church I attended, because I didn't hold to the doctrine of Eternal Security. I argued against Eternal Security, because I saw more scriptural support against the doctrine than for it. I was accused of being divisive, for voicing my concern about that doctrine. I took it to heart and really pondered what Christian unity was supposed to look like. It lead me to think, "If it's possible for me to submit to my elder and maintain unity with the congregation even though we disagree on doctrine, why not choose to be united to the Catholic Church? Why am I just trying to be unified to one congregation rather than with the more historic Church?" When I couldn't join that Baptist congregation, it really made me think, "Why am I Baptist? Why not Lutheran or some other denomination? Why is the Church fragmented into so many denominations anyway?"

[@microcolonel]

Ever wonder why the Protestants rejected the Roman church, and not the Orthodox Church? The patriarch of Rome set the blueprint for schism, and made protestantism inevitable.

[@J-PLeigh8409]

Thats it, all the different denoms & doctrines are head spinning. I recently came home to the holy Catholic Church, & mostly because the Protest & its many different doctrines along w/ Solas, I could not defend any longer, & wanting to be part of the ancient apostolic church Christ gave us was very important & w/ it an appreciation for church history & the great martyrs before us. I personally through Protestantism, went to 3 different denoms & they were worlds apart & all had problems & even lastly as Lutheran, they did not even hold to all Luther held to, not to mention all the Protest is even far from the Reformers beliefs, hence the Reformation Schism already a problem, but see forms even far from it, & of course original ancient holy Christendom

[@marcihf217]

Welcome Home ❤❤❤

[@J-PLeigh8409]

@YAJUN YUAN hence each is their own baby pope, or as Trent Horn pointed out, they always have an out, also good point but too bad SDA's dont do this in regard to their cultish false prophetess pope Ellen White. So as we see through apostolic succession, the ancient church remains & abides in the holy apostolic catholic church, the fullness of the holy faith

[@J-PLeigh8409]

@@marcihf217 thank you much & peace to like minded believers in the Son of God Jesus Christ

[@marcihf217]

@@J-PLeigh8409 You are welcome. 🤗😎

[@takmaps]

Amen brother

[@thankfullyforgiven9611]

Honestly, I think a lot of people are Protestant or Evangelicals , because that’s all they ever knew. For a lot of rural areas, there is no Catholic Church. Truthfully they don’t have a desire to drive 45 minutes to get to a church, because they feel God in their church. They feel like they were saved in the church they’re in, they’re trying their best to serve the Lord, and they’re good with that. Plus they’ve heard enough about Catholicism that’s false from people they trust, that gives them no reason to search into it deeper.

[@johnyang1420]

Online RCIA

[@MelaniesManicures]

That’s an honest perspective and I respect it.

[@zarganon9594]

I agree, people want a church that has people from their own community, and in many rural places the closest church is almost always prot.

[@thankfullyforgiven9611]

@@MelaniesManicures I appreciate that Melanie.😊 It’s just what I’ve seen in my family and friends. It’s truly difficult to convince them otherwise.

[@thankfullyforgiven9611]

@@zarganon9594 Absolutely. They feel like God has a purpose for using them as a light for Him in their communities. They truly love God and are trying to serve in there. 😊

[@aureumursa1833]

I have a good friend who's Evangelical and she denies being Protestant. She says she's just Christian. My Baptist cousin says the same. It seems to me that they acknowledge there is some sort of negative connotation with being Protestant, just won't admit it, and want to disassociate themselves with it even though they are both believe in sola scriptura and literal interpretation of the Bible (except for the Eucharist of course 🙄). My Lutheran friend on the other hand says any non-Catholic, non-Orthodox Christian is Protestant. At least he and I can agree on something. I keep praying for conversion of these people. My wife and I truly need Catholic friends.

[@Essex626]

Most Evangelicals are really Baptist, and a lot of Baptists buy into the legend of Baptist Succession, which is a completely ahistorical theory that there is a thread of "true Christians" who were never part of the Catholic church, and that is what Baptists descend from. It's totally unsupported by historical record, but that's what I was taught growing up.

[@chicken-911]

Interestingly enough, some Protestants such as Cameron Bertuzzi a few years back, do not want to be identified as Evangelical but simply just Protestant. Also, and I'm not the only one, i find it a bit offensive if people who do not want to be called Protestant will just claim the name Christian vs. Others. (eg. Common statements like "I was Catholic and now I am Christian"), or mainstreaming the terms "born again" with a specific meaning only acceptable to them, and making it an exclusive identity. It all just sounds condescending to me.

[@judyswiderski2682]

@@chicken-911 Did you not know that in the end times there will be a great falling away? There are many charlatans out there. But the truth remains the same. Look and see what Jesus says about being born again. You are damned without it. You must be born again. John 3:3, 5, 7. "Jesus answered, Verily, verily I say unto thee, zexcrpt a man be born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God. That which is born of flesh is flesh and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit. Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born again." John 3:5-7. You are listening to the reasoning of churches that are under the law. "Now the Spirt speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils, Forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from meats, which God hath created to be received with thanksgiving of them which believe and know the truth." 1 Timothy 4:1-3. Forbidding to marry is a doctrine of devils??? "These people drawer nigh unto me with their mouth, and honoreth me with their lips, but their heart is far from me. But in vain do they worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men." Matthew 18:8-9. No where in scripture does it say that missing mass is a mortal sin. The RCC places their traditions equal to or greater than God's word. This is not acceptable to God. Plus, your church accepts a Jesus that lies. They have had many years to correct it. How amazing they have not cared to do it. Thri Jesus tells his brothers I am not going to the feast. Which means I am not going to the feast. Yet he goes. Liar. This is major BLASPHEMY. Jesus actually said I am not going up yet to the feast. Not now, not yet. No problem. No lie. No where in scripture does it say that missing mass is a mortal sin.

[@roseg1333]

Go to a Catholic church and try to start conversations with Catholic couples and try to parlay that into a friendship that you can do things together like movie night or game night etc I know we Catholics are not super good at this but keep trying you will get Catholic friends soon ❤️🕊🙏🏼

[@judyswiderski2682]

For four hundred years we, those who are called Protestant had the King James Bible. Then in 1858 your church changed the inspired word of God to the Alexandrian manuscripts. They are conflicting, uninspired and lying bibles. Thus they have help to destroy true Christian faith. LYING BIBLES! The bible has been changed. Did God say? Come on, really? God said He preserved His word. Psalm 12:6-7. Most modern bibles do not. In other words they are not admitting that God has a standard, His inspired word. His word is quick (alive) and quickens (gives life). His word is eternal. Most of the modern bibles have at least one out and out lie. NKJB lies in Exodus 6:3. They began to call on the name of the Lord in Genesis 4:26. Others quote Jesus telling his brothers, i am not going to the feast. John 7:8. (Is he saying he is going to break the law of Moses?) He waits and then goes. Liar! BLASPHEMY . Jesus simply said, not going now, not yet. He waits and then goes. No problem, no lie. And blatantly they mock Jesus and unashamedly, constantly, with each change ask, Did God say? Did God say Mark 11:26? Absolutely. It is an essential part of our walk with God. A verse that makes us tremble was added????? Did God say? Acts 15:34? It shows God's divine providence. Silas was there when Paul needed him for a journey. Obviously Silas remained there. BRAZENLY, they change or remove a word that gives the believers true power! Matthew 12:31 and Mark 9:29! Some spiritual warfare needs prayer and fasting! Did God say eleven (11) times in the New Testament the word damnation, eternal burning? Yes. But not in theirs! Did God say? Did God give three witnesses to that truth? Mark 9:44, 46, 48. They however only have v48. The other two they ask, Did God say? This is important because we need to know the truth and those who preach Annialism, we cease to exist, are easily proven wrong with these verses. Jesus is God and Jesus is Man. Hebrews supports this with four verses, 3:3, 7:24, 8:3 and 10:12: "But this man, after he had offered one sacrifice for sin for ever, sat down at rhe right hand of God; v10:12. They do not use the clarifying words 'this man' at all. Again, Did God say? Every change they make is an insult to God and His word. God said He would curse those who add to or take from His word. Revelation 22:18-19. In the Old Testament those who honored a false prophet received the reward of that prophet. So the Alexandrian translators, the bible societies the publishers, the promoters, sellers and those who teach from them (showing those ear tickling bibles as God's word) or honor them will be held responsible. If done ignorantly, repent. God will not be mocked. This happened when the inspired Antioch manuscripts called the Textus Receptus were replaced by the Alexandrian manuscripts called the Codex B or the Vaticanus from the Vatican basement, and the Sianiticus from a monestary. They do not agree with each other and the latter has about 30 changes per page. Obviously inspired by their spiritual father who brings conflict, frustration, despair and DOUBT. King James Bible online Helpful tool: Noah Webster 1828 Dictionary online: Look up: REPENT, REGENERATION, BELIEVE, FAITH, REDEMPTION, PERFECT, CONVERSATION, PREVENT, PROPITIATION etc. Suppliers: Churchkjb.com Localchurchbiblepublishers.com Sources: Adullum Films Documentary -Tares Among the Wheat video Books: The Revision Revised and The Last Twelve Verses of Mark, both by William Burgon. Dean Burgon lived during the time of Wescott and Hort. Book: Look What's Missing by David Daniels Chick.com. If interested an old video called The Forbidden Book video. It has some American History also.

[@cultofmodernism8477]

When a Protestant tells you that they can't accept "accretions" because they "only" date back to the 400s.

[@theosebes9975]

@YAJUN YUAN Not necessarily. The Holy Spirit was protecting the Church, Protestantism has always been in schism from the Church.

[@cactoidjim1477]

@YAJUN YUAN How does that make logical sense? Oneness Pentecostals are as protected as Calvinists, Arminians, and Baptists? Jehovah's Witnesses? Mormons? In what sense - how - are contradictory traditions all equally protected? What could that protection possibly entail?

[@JeansiByxan]

400 years is a LONG time. You realize that that is longer in duration than the Industrial Revolution is from our own time.

[@jon6car]

@@JeansiByxan 1,500 is even longer...

[@JeansiByxan]

Another thing to think about is that the LGBTQ stuff has only been around for a short while, give or take fifty years. It's not impossible that a more localized doctrine could develop over 100 years, much less 400 years.

[@Isaakios82]

I really appreciate this discussion. Thanks to both of you.

[@patriciahutchenszimmerman9357]

I spent 60 years as a protestant after being born a Catholic. I cam back to the Church in the last few years. I find the idea of Scripture only to be a very iffy argument. Not only because there are so many opinions and understanding any scripture and the number of Commentaries, explainions and books written on people's opinions and there is all the "prophets, seers, apostles" who have differing "prophecies" and personal revelation. Oh and there is just as much sin, injustices, ugly stuff going on in the protestant church. I have been in close contact many ministers because of my husband's position as a preacher. Sin is rampant in human existence with no constraints against anyone

[@Wgaither1]

Sorry no one is born Catholic or even Protestant. Did you mean brought up Catholic?

[@danielhaas9469]

@patricia Hutchens Zimmerman sorry for your poor experiences. But unfortunately, humans are sinful creatures who do bad things. There are good pastors and bad ones good popes and bad ones. Scripture is the very word of God and through it we come to know him by it. First the Jews and now us who believe in God through Christ our Lord. Trust upon his word and not man's. For man's will disappoint you but God will never disappoint and will always keeps his promises even when we are unfaithful towards him. I hope that helps to strengthen your position on scripture.

[@matthewbroderick6287]

Daniel, the Word of God is foremost, Jesus Christ, and then the oral teaching of the Apostles, Including the 7 Apostles who never wrote anything down, and then the written word, which came way after the Church was already in existence, as the manifold wisdom of God is revealed through the CHURCH! Peace always in Jesus Christ our Great and Kind God and Savior, He whose Flesh is true food and Blood true drink

[@danielhaas9469]

@@matthewbroderick6287 what came before the gospel? Was it not what was written down for our benefit to know God and his promises by the prophets? Therefore, ALL of our knowledge of how to live out our faith through Christ is known and what is known is written and what is not written is unknowable for how can it be tested? God who is our rock has given us all things necessary to be saved.

[@roseg1333]

Welcome back! We are glad you are here may the angels rejoice in heaven 🙏🏼🕊✝️❤️🙏🏼

[@kiwicoproductions2828]

Trent...do you think we'll ever see you and Dyer in another debate/dialogue? I thought your first exchange with him was fascinating! Craig is a really good guy also.

[@JohnBrown-eb9yl]

Excellent discussion. Have you two discussed differences east and west? I’d like to hear that.

[@pauloicaro]

In regards to unworthiness, being unworthy to receive the Holly Communion means you're unworthy of heaven as well, therefore receiving the Eucharist would aggravate a pre-existing condition and wouldn't put you in it.

[@NotSoCradleCatholic]

22:00 another argument for confession can be found in Joshua chapter 7. I was reading my Bible a couple of weeks ago and in Joshua 7, there was a man among the Israelites that sinned. He took something from a city that they invaded that God told them not to take. Then the following happened ”Joshua said to Achan, “My son, give glory to the Lord, the God of Israel, and praise him by telling me what you have done; do not hide it from me.” Achan answered Joshua, “I have indeed sinned against the Lord, the God of Israel. This is what I have done:“ ‭‭Joshua‬ ‭7‬:‭19‬-‭20‬ ‭ Then in the following verses, the man went on to confess to Joshua what he took Edit: and then they stoned him to death, but that’s besides the point

[@HaleStorm49]

Jim Halpert to Dwight Schrute: " _which schism is best?_ "

[@IsaiahINRI]

That's debatable. There are basically two schools of theology

[@MelaniesManicures]

I think you should literally go down the line of all the denominations that we know of.. why you’re not Methodist, why you’re not Baptist… etc. I’m pretty sure you’ve done these but you understand what I mean. As a Protestant I didn’t even know I was. I was a Methodist. So I think you can evangelize better when you target each audience.

[@cactoidjim1477]

I tried doing that and was immediately overwhelmed. It's chaos. So, I tried to just trace the history and identify the types of 'Baptist' traditions since I was raised Baptist. I did not get far after 3 months of work and gave up on trying to create a 'family tree' of just churches that identify as 'Baptist'

[@MelaniesManicures]

@@cactoidjim1477 i understand but some is better than none. Good on you for trying! It’s just a suggestion because as a Catholic I just want as many people to know the truth as possible and the fullness of our faith.

[@MelaniesManicures]

@YAJUN YUAN i understand but I didn’t believe in transubstantiation as a Protestant and converted so I think it’s worth a shot. I don’t mean in the apologist arguing area, I’m meaning doing videos to help share knowledge and evangelize.

[@cactoidjim1477]

@@MelaniesManicures Yeah, I swam the Tiber in 2011. William Henry Cobbett's (an Anglican) book "A History of the Protestant Reformation in England" is mind blowing. Most of the anti-Catholic rhetoric "we all know" came out of the 18th-19th century English monarchy propaganda - and that was heavily imported to the US.

[@fabiotuan5206]

@@MelaniesManicures The WORD became flesh! At communion we take the bread ( body/blood) that is symbolic for the living WORD into which we actually eat! Get it God bless

[@theperegrinecatholic2892]

Protestants wrongly accuse Catholics and Orthodox of idolatry yet the object of Protestant worship is the Bible.

[@georgwagner937]

No.

[@jwilsonhandmadeknives2760]

Yes, this is too accurate in a lot of cases. Far too many protestants have zero idea of how the bible came to be. They are all-in on “God-breathed” to the point that they almost believe that the bible basically self materialized.

[@roseg1333]

Yeah that is true they can idolize it

[@shobudski6776]

Orthodox here, You are correct. They idolize it at the expense of the Holy Mysteries (Sacraments ) thus have an incomplete faith.

[@candyclews4047]

huh? Scripture is the inspired word of God. Not that we genuflect or bow down to our Bibles but sure, we worship it's contents.

[@PuzzlesC4M]

I usually distinguish evangelicalism/ non-denominationalism from "capital P Protestantism" as a remonstrant to show that I'm not a TULIP believer. Don't forget that Protestants were rejected by other Protestants and were accused of a "return to Rome" for this. In some ways it seems like Reformed protestants have an easier time converting and making a 180 than people like me with a Wesleyan heritage that already ascribe to a lot of traditional doctrines and are used to "flirting" with Eastern Orthodoxy and Catholicism without making the leap. The weaving together of tradition, scripture, and reason is the key to winning us over. And the sacraments! Everything really is too good to leave out.

[@nickhanley5407]

It’s not about us leaving something out, it’s about not adding to the teachings of the apostles.

[@HolyKhaaaaan]

@@nickhanley5407 why not both? If the court can demand "the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth", why not you as a Christian?

[@PuzzlesC4M]

@@nickhanley5407 I meant not leaving out the sacraments when explaining the Catholic faith to us and winning us over. The more I understand the sacraments, the more it makes sense of what I know from the Bible and lived experience.

[@mac3441]

It’s funny, I was watching a Truth Unites video last week and Dr. Ortlund said something like “and sadly there are schisms” and all I could think is how can a Protestant say that at all? Not only because they’re in schism, but on Protestantism, what is that?

[@mac3441]

@YAJUN YUAN does that require the separated group to preach heresy, and if so, what’s that mean to a Protestant? Or is it as simple as Baptists and Methodists and Lutherans and etc etc are all in Schism with each other? Like I really don’t get what schism could possibly mean outside of a Church-as-visible-institution paradigm, something Ortlund and others reject.

[@missinterpretation4984]

That’s called copium

[@ironyusa3885]

I would love to sit and have this conversation with Trent.

[@IdlePeasant]

As a Protestant, I've been struggling with this for years. I'm currently studying church history, and it's clear to me that prior to the 16th Century, and prior to the Great Schism, the church was one. The latin speaking west and the greek speaking east made up the one, holy, apostolic church. I am grieved by the divisions within Protestantism, and have grown weary by it. My deepest desire is to be reunited with the ancient church, the one which can trace its roots all the way back to the apostles. For these reasons, I have truly contemplated leaving Protestantism altogether in order to join either the Roman Catholic or Eastern Orthodox Church. However, as a Protestant, there are some major hurdles that I just can't seem to get over. I was very much ready to jump over to the Roman Catholic Church, but when I came across Pope Francis' "Act of Consecration to the Immaculate Heart of Mary" back in March, 2022, I read over the prayer and could not bring myself to do it. Towards the end of this prayer to the Virgin Mary, Pope Francis says this, "To you we consecrate the future of the whole human family, the needs and expectations of every people, the anxieties and hopes of the world." This is the part that broke me. All glory, honor, and reverence is due to God alone. If anything is to be consecrated, it must be consecrated to the Lord, and no other. Therefore, I could not bring myself to become Roman Catholic because it would mean that my devotion would be divided between God and Mary. Why would Pope Francis' prayer to "consecrate the future of the whole human family" not be made to the One who is Creator of all things? Despite the ancient heritage of the Roman Catholic Church, I just can't bring myself to venerate the Virgin Mary in the same way that Pope Francis demonstrated back in March, 2022. Due to these barriers between Roman Catholicism and myself, I considered the Eastern Orthodox Church. I admire the fact that the Eastern Church holds true to the original seven ecumenical councils. I believe that between the two, Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox, its the Eastern Orthodox Church that has remained truer to its apostolic roots. While the Roman Catholic Church admits that theology is like a seed that evolves over time, the Eastern Orthodox for the most part have not changed anything that was already established by the first seven ecumenical councils. However, there are some hurdles that I can't seem to jump over for the Eastern Orthodox Church as well. I cannot seem to understand the cult of the relics. Whether it be the corpse of a saint or the supposed "shroud of turin," I find that the obsession with these relics is close to idolatry. Now I understand that the Roman Catholic Church also has relics of its own, but either way, I can't seem to find peace about the cult of the relics. The veneration of these relics did not develop until the Third Century of Christianity, so we know that the original apostles and First Century Christians did not practice such things. Their full devotion would have been to the worship of our Lord. Lastly, and perhaps this has been mentioned elsewhere, the current division between Russia and Constantinople in the Eastern Church, is what has caused me to put a hold on my desire to join the Eastern Church. The church has not been called to divisions and dissentions, just as the video talks about. Yet, we have a great divide now within the Eastern Church between Constantinople and Russia. How can the one true church (which Christ promised that he would preserve) be so divided? Am I to join the Russian Orthodox Church, or a church that is still in communion with Constantinople? In conclusion, I am still grieved by the divisions within Protestantism, and have a deep longing to reunited with the ancient church. However, as I look at both the Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox Church, I find that there are still some large hurdles that I cannot cross. Namely, the devotion that is given to Mary (which is due to God alone), the cult of the relics, and the schism between Russia and Constantinople, as well as the Great Schism which still remains between the Western and Eastern Church.

[@littlerock5256]

Idle Peasant: "the devotion that is given to Mary (which is due to God alone)" This does not exist in the Catholic Church. There is dulia, a theological term signifying the honour paid to the saints, hyperdulia, the veneration offered to the Blessed Virgin Mary. and latria, which means the worship given to God alone. I will keep you in my prayers.

[@annb9029]

Catholics only worship God , Saints we only honor, Nobody has to do the below, I don’t follow Mary and I am Catholic but some do and that is great . I will say the Hail Mary but she is not my go to Saint. I follow St John the Baptist and try to live by his example and ask him to pray for me to Jesus. But some Catholics don’t follow any Saint at all and that’s fine its not something you have to do. If you are catholic You just can’t say its wrong to ask a Saint to pray for you or say it’s wrong Consecrate to a Saint for a certain issue (like abortion) or country (like America needs to be more like Mary) those things are what the church teaches , but you don’t have to follow any saint if you don’t want to. What does it mean to consecrate something to Mary? Consecration to Mary must explicitly state that our ultimate goal and end is God (Holy Spirit; Christ our Lord). Consecrations to Mary where one pledges to perform all actions "through Mary, in Mary, and for Mary" are in fact a pledge to perform them more perfectly through Jesus Christ, with him, in, and for him. What is Marian Consecration? One of the definitions for the word “consecrate” is to “dedicate formally to a religious or divine purpose” (source). Marian consecration is the act of entrusting one’s body, soul, possessions, works, and entire life to the protection, guidance, and intercession of Our Lady to live more like Mary. The act of entrusting oneself to Mary’s care and intercession is nothing new. Jesus Himself entrusted His beloved disciple, John, to Mary while He was on the Cross (John 19:26-27). The early Christians and Church fathers recognized Mary’s holiness and her significance as the Mother of God. We’ve been asking for Mary’s intercession and intervention in our lives since the beginning of the Church. She is, after all, our mother, too. A more formal method of consecration to Mary was developed by Saint Louis de Montfort in the 1600s. His 33-day prayer consists of short instructions on why one would even consecrate themselves to Mary in the first place (more on that below) and praying the Rosary and other various prayers to Mary and God. This period of prayer culminates in a beautiful prayer of consecration that one makes in conjunction with the Sacrament of Reconciliation and the reception of Holy Communion, ideally on a Marian feast day.

[@julieelizabeth4856]

I was happy to read nowhere in your comment that we "worship" Mary which is a common argument among Protestants. Luther retained his devotion to Mary (so much for "Bible Alone") but she was delegated to the background over time among the Reformers. The consecration was requested by Mary herself in an apparition. It has been believed by many that it wasn't done correctly years ago, so Pope Francis did it again this year. Of course as Catholics we aren't required to believe any apparition. The Church declares some "worthy of belief" after much investigation. Three months later this year we got the overturning of Roe. Maybe a coincidence, maybe not. There is something about the Ark being present for three months, both in the Old Testament and in the New Testament. The pagan Romans were repulsed by and afraid of dead bodies. The dead were buried outside the city. They hated the way the early Christians collected and carried around bits and pieces of martyrs who died for their faith, and altars were built on top of places where martyrs were killed. It is always obvious when an area became Christian because the cemeteries were moved into the cities. Just as we plant flowers on graves, it is honor, not idolatry. We have three levels of honor in the Catholic Church - dulia, hyper-dulia and latria. Dulia is given to the saints, hyper-dulia is for Mary since she is the greatest saint, and latria is for God alone. That highest level of devotion is never divided. As a cradle Catholic I've been tempted myself to check out Eastern Orthodoxy because they retained the beautiful liturgy (we have to be careful of Catholic churches who offer clown-like Masses) but as you said, there is division in Orthodoxy too. And just as the J3ws had no authority to close their canon because Jesus took that authority from them, I don't agree that the Orthodox had the authority to reject new understanding after a certain number of ecumenical councils either.

[@IdlePeasant]

Thank you for the kind and informative comments. As I mentioned in my OP, though I am a Protestant, I am still seeking and truly desire to be united with the apostolic church, wherever that may be. All input and helpful guidance is much appreciated.

[@kayleebaginski]

Wow! Super honest reflection! I really appreciate your post here for how honest and insightful it is. I grew up Catholic in my elementary years, but my family stopped practicing, and I ended up spending the majority of my time with my Protestant friends. They showed me the Christian walk, took me to their youth group and their church services, and basically read Scripture when I was usually with them and their family. Even though nearly all my Christian education came from Protestant teaching, as I grew up (27 years old now) I just could not step away from the Catholic Church. Around age 24 I made the decision to stop dabbling in both Catholic and Protestant churches, and just go straight all in into the Catholic Church. As the years have gone by since then, I’m still learning more and more about doctrine, apologetic, catechism, scripture, etc, and I find myself in the SAME situation as you are. I’m Catholic but I seriously have the same tough time with nearly all Marian doctrine. I still pray the “Hail Mary” prayer, but the Rosary and Assumption and Immaculate Conception are all challenging doctrines for me to believe in. Same with Purgatory. But the papacy makes sense to me. It’s a scary and challenging conflict, and I want to seek out and live in the truth. Which seems like you’re doing the same :) I feel I can relate. I appreciate your post on this, and I will be praying for you!!!

[@robertd9743]

Thanks!

[@alexjurado6029]

I’m sorry, but I think it’s soooo stupid when someone says, “the Church Fathers weren’t Catholic, Orthodox, or Protestant..” does that mean that ancient, Apostolic Christianity died out and no longer exists today???? Such nonsense.

[@alexjurado6029]

@YAJUN YUAN umm…okay? And what? Are you suggesting that pre-Nicene Christianity and post-Nicene Christianity are different? Is there no continuity to ancient Christianity post-Nicaea??

[@Apologia14]

It means their doctrine did not match exactly any of the three.

[@no-one-787]

@@Apologia14 So it died out and no longer exists today? We have to pick up the pieces now from only the Bible and nothing else whatsoever to reconstruct what we thought the faith was? Ridiculous.

[@Apologia14]

@@no-one-787 you need to face facts: the early Christians did not believe what you believe today. We should do our best the practice the faith of the apostles. The Bible is the surest repository of that faith. Nothing ridiculous about that.

[@iqgustavo]

🎯 Key Takeaways for quick navigation: 00:03 🎙️ The episode features a dialogue between Trent Horn and Eastern Orthodox apologist Craig Truglia discussing why they are not Protestant. 00:32 🧐 Trent Horn challenges common reasons for being Protestant, which often rely on negative views of Catholicism. 03:18 🕊️ Trent, a Catholic convert, outlines his reasons for not being Protestant, including the difficulty of bridging the gap from Mere Christianity to Protestantism's theological framework. 05:07 🔥 Trent critiques the lack of strong biblical and historical support for Sola Scriptura, a foundational principle of Protestantism. 06:55 🤔 The conversation delves into the lack of unity among Protestants, particularly regarding essential doctrines, questioning the basis of defining who is "Protestant." 08:17 🕊️ The significance of liturgy and Christian tradition in Catholic and Orthodox worship is emphasized as a contrast to some Protestant forms. 09:41 🎵 The aesthetics and experience of worship differ between Protestant and Catholic/Orthodox traditions, impacting the sense of authenticity and depth. 12:15 💔 People often stay in Protestantism due to family ties, convenience, and comfort, rather than intellectual reasons. 15:06 📚 Orthodoxy and Catholicism provide a uniformity in worship practices and teachings, allowing for a consistent experience across parishes. 18:07 🌍 A love for church history, desire for epistemic certainty, and appreciation for the church as the body of Christ are common reasons for leaving Protestantism. 21:05 🛡️ Protestantism's failure to fully embrace practices and teachings found in the Scriptures, like confession, leads to a critique of its fulfillment of biblical mandates. 22:14 📜 The importance of acknowledging one's sins and not deceiving oneself or others about being a sinner. 23:09 🤝 The evolution of confession practices from public to private and the significance of confessing sins in a community context. 24:33 🍞🍷 The literal interpretation of Eucharist and its importance in the context of faith and salvation. 25:32 📖 The inconsistency in applying perspicuity of scriptures in Protestantism, based on their adherence to certain doctrines. 26:15 🛤️ The need to critically examine foundational presumptions within Protestantism, like the symbolism of sacraments, in light of scripture. 27:25 💧 The lack of emphasis on sacraments like the anointing of the sick (unction) in Protestant practices compared to the scriptures. 28:47 💬 Comparing the practice of sacraments like baptism and communion to the rarity of practices like confession and anointing of the sick in Protestantism. 31:07 🗣️ Addressing the concept of speaking in tongues and its occurrence within Orthodoxy in the context of speaking different languages. 34:50 🔗 The absence of Apostolic succession and ordination as described in scripture in most Protestant denominations. 36:00 🌐 The biblical model of receiving and transmitting teachings through the laying on of hands and ordination within a succession of authority. 41:06 📜 Practices and customs like praying for the dead, head coverings, and reading scriptures in multiple languages still found in Orthodoxy. 42:57 ✨ The belief in ongoing miracles and supernatural gifts within Orthodox tradition, in contrast to the skepticism in some Protestant circles. 44:08 🧭 Summarizing the key point: Orthodox tradition adheres closely to the practices and teachings of the apostles as presented in the scriptures. 44:35 📜 Pauline Epistles on cessationism and miracles: Protestants defending cessationism use arguments similar to atheists against miracles; miracles aren't proof of perfect theology. 46:11 ✨ Miracles as theological endorsements: Miracles, like Eucharistic and Fatima miracles, suggest alignment with certain theological traditions like Orthodoxy. 48:03 🙏 Schism as a serious sin: Schism is a grave sin in early Christian sources, condemned by Paul and recognized as damnable by early Church Fathers. 52:53 🛐 Meaning of Galatians 5: Schism is rejecting proper authority, not just doctrinal differences; Paul's emphasis is on virtuous conduct and unity in the Church. 54:47 📜 Church Fathers on schism: Early Christian writers, except Ticonius, unanimously view schism as a serious sin that can lead to damnation. 58:02 🏛️ Schism within Protestantism: Within Protestantism, the concept of schism is blurred by the rejection of human authority in favor of personal interpretation of scripture. 01:00:07 📜 Augustine's view on salvation: Augustine's teachings on salvation outside the Catholic Church require proper context, focusing on faith, love for Christ's body, and intent. 01:04:18 🔍 Examining Church Fathers' writings: Some Protestants creatively interpret early Church Fathers to align more with Protestant beliefs, but clear statements about schism and salvation exist. 01:06:55 🧐 The distinction between Protestantism and Eastern Orthodoxy in terms of perspectives on church history and authority. 01:07:51 📚 The challenge of reconciling reformation-era Protestantism with the beliefs of the early Church Fathers. 01:08:18 📜 The difficulty of defining schism within Protestantism due to the lack of consistent criteria and its implications. 01:09:01 🧐 The tendency to redefine sins to justify one's actions and beliefs, particularly evident in the issue of schism. 01:10:01 🙏 The moral dilemma of Protestantism rejecting the veneration of saints, considering the historical significance of the saints in preserving the faith. 01:11:24 📖 The inconsistency of Protestantism in rejecting teachings of saints while accepting the Bible from the same tradition. 01:13:16 🛤️ The divergence between historical Protestantism's state churches and modern low-church evangelicalism, indicating significant shifts in tradition. 01:14:28 📊 The contrast in doctrinal agreement within Protestantism versus Orthodoxy/Catholicism, pointing to unity rooted in common authority and tradition. 01:15:53 🏛️ The impact of differing perspectives on saints and historical continuity, raising questions about legitimacy and historical pedigree. 01:17:04 📜 The interpretation of challenging sayings from Scripture and saints, highlighting the role of typology and nuanced understanding. 01:18:12 🧐 The absence of precedent for Protestantism, leading to unprecedentism, and its potential moral dangers. 01:20:45 🌐 The importance of historical continuity and pedigree when evaluating theological beliefs, particularly in comparing Protestantism with other traditions. 01:24:04 📜 The relevance of excommunication and church authority in addressing issues of schism, contrasting practices within Protestantism and other traditions. 01:25:01 📅 A discussion about the historical claims of early Protestant existence and the importance of accurate historical analysis. 01:25:53 🤔 Factors contributing to Protestants remaining Protestant despite awareness of church history, such as redefining terms, overlooking evidence, and theological adaptation. 01:28:25 🕰️ Interpretive framework and personal predispositions influence how people view church history and theology. 01:28:53 🪦 Differences in practices like relic maintenance can lead to a relativistic perspective on theology. 01:29:47 🔄 Some adopt a relativistic stance, claiming church fathers don't align with any specific tradition. 01:30:01 🔀 The trajectory of theological traditions varies; some traditions align more closely with fathers' teachings. 01:30:44 💒 People can intellectually agree with a tradition but struggle with unfamiliar practices. 01:30:57 💔 Emotional disconnect with unfamiliar practices can affect commitment to a theological tradition. 01:31:38 💧 Argument about immersion and theological correctness; denies that immersion is the only valid form of baptism. 01:32:47 🍞 Christ's presence in the Eucharist is a key indicator of theological correctness. 01:33:29 📺 Trent's KZbin channel "Council of Trent" covers apologetics, debates, and more. He's working on books too.

[@southpawhammer8644]

I speak in tongues, hold over from my AG days LoL. Praying in private I sometimes have interpretation, praying in a group I don't "speak" unless I know I also have an interpretation. In reality it's the only thing that got be through converting to Catholic. Still working my way through the Mary dogmas.

[@ernesto.748]

Do you know other Catholics who speak in tongues? Cause I’m Protestant and I know a preacher who was actually invited to a Catholic Church and he basically gave a testimony about how those Catholics that he preached too also spoke in tongues

[@southpawhammer8644]

@@ernesto.748 not yet, I'm still pretty new and haven't made many friends. The parish I'm in is not charismatic but it's is very friendly. I'm not counting on finding anyone who prays in tongues, most have been in the Catholic Church their whole lives. Their interactions with evangelicals has not been good.

[@ernesto.748]

@@southpawhammer8644 ohh okay I see! May God keep on guiding you 🙏🏼 God bless!

[@HamSamich99]

1:19:00 heres your alternative that allows Protestants to reject the sainthood of saints but retain their scholarship: it is not our place to judge on Gods behalf and when we call someone a saint, we imply they have been saved and thus are already in Heaven. No man knows, not even the Pope, who has been saved and allowed entrance into Heaven. If their theology and scholarship is constructed appropriately out of scripture, then yes us Protestants can absolutely use their works (as in studies) to further understand or apply further context to scripture. Their "sainthood" is independent of their scholarly works. And the proof behind that is that there are many catholic theologians widely cited time to time in scholarship work, studies, or academics who are not saints. So as a Protestant Im merely rejecting the confirmation by men that theyve been saved because only God can choose that, not that their academics are poor or bad.

[@WC_Refugee]

I've heard a protestant explain why they don't anoint the sick because anointing the sick was an ancient medicine so now we have doctors and modern medicine.

[@artisdead2]

Trent, you should reach out and dialogue with the channel Daily Disciple. I’d love to see a conversation piece between the two of you.

[@darlameeks]

I'm an Episcopalian considering RCIA (I'm getting a lot out of your videos, Trent...and glad to have this introduction to Craig), but I can say that we have all the same Sacraments as the RCC, and our liturgy is almost identical. You are correct that Confession isn't used often, though some parishes practice Unction regularly. You mentioned glossolalia, Trent...a gift I received when I was 18 in what I can only call "the Baptism with the Holy Spirit". It was an intensely intimate experience with the Lord after which I was never the same...this was way before I was ever confirmed in the Anglican Communion some 7 years later. I have attended Catholic Charismatic Mass and prayer services in years past. I agree that this gift is to be used in private unless there is an interpretation, but it is extremely useful in the prayer closet when you don't know how to pray. You might be interested to know that the current Archbishop of Canterbury prays in tongues during his private devotions, as does theologian and former Bishop of Durham NT Wright. I have also heard of people speaking spontaneously in a human language they never learned, only to find out that it is the native language of a visitor who needs a word of consolation from the Lord.

[@pepehaydn7039]

Hello. Right. I love anglican Sermons by Newman and of Course anglican theology by Lewis. I was Several months in England and Scotland and it is amazing how similar our liturgies are. I attended several anglican Masses and, ok, they are almost identical to Novus Ordo. However, the Lord is NOT there. I specially remember a Sunday anglican mass in London, in Camdem, in a small church with a man-priest and I felt Like at Home until the Eucharist came and, oh, The Lord is NOT there. I remember a mass in Saint Paul cathedral with a Female-priest and the Lord was Not there! After the mass a Woman was on her Knees praying before a picture of the Lord... and oh, it was very painful. The Lord is NOT there, because He has been rejected and, However, the Lord is there in the hearts of baptized believers.

[@moowen9767]

My favorite part of this video is a catholic and orthodox talking about submitting to authority in lieu on 1054.

[@believer8793]

Over the last two years I have been looking deeply into the history of the church and for the first time in my life as a Christian(Protestant) I would have to totally agree with everything you two gentlemen are stating. I am converting over to orthodoxy and currently a catechumen. As a former protestant serving in multiple protestant churches in different denominations I found this to be a problem, seeing when someone disagreed with the head pastor went down the block and Got ordained from another pastor and not knowing the schism that took place at their former church, simply opened up their own church. In our Bible studies people we disagree on certain passages even to the point after studies certain people would come together and explained how they disagreed and went to the church down the block. Protestants know this to be true but for whatever reason would deny this. Most pastors were ignorant about the history of the church as was I. Thank you for your honesty it has open my eyes.

[@suzannemcmaken4648]

Orthodoxy only brings

[@suzannemcmaken4648]

Orthodoxy only brings legalism and a works based system of salvation antithetical to Christ’s teaching of salvation solely through belief and forgiveness of sins achieved by Christ paying the penalty for mankind.

[@believer8793]

When you say legalism what do you mean? Orthodoxy never teaches You are saved by works but rather continuing to abide in Christ. Rather than once saved always saved. I’ve been an evangelical protestant for 30 years and I have been to five different denominations each teaching different doctrines. And the orthodoxy that I’m learning never teaches you are saved by works but rather that it is God working in us and through us. evangelical protestant ism says say a prayer and that’s all that’s needed.

[@believer8793]

When Christ says to abide in him What does that mean? Orthodoxy has saved me from myself

[@suzannemcmaken4648]

@@believer8793 Really?! There are no creeds you must believe in an orthodox “church?” No rituals performed you must participate in? No specific works to gain salvation? Legalism are rules. Certain hoops you need to obey to be a part of that particular belief system. Every time you sin you lose your salvation? Christ casts you aside? That would be cruel. You could never have assurance could you? Does scripture state you lose your salvation? JOHN 10:27-30. “My sheep hear my voice and I know them, and they follow ME. And, I give them eternal life, AND THEY SHALL NEVER PERISH; neither shall anyone snatch them out of My hand. My Father who has given them to me, is greater than all, and no one is able to snatch them out of His hand. I and the Father are one.” That is the Christ I know. That is the Father I know. “And, they shall NEVER perish.” No where in scripture does it state the Living God casts a believer aside. And, who is a believer? Someone who believes in Christ the Son of the Living Christ for his/her salvation and complete forgiveness of sins. A believer abides in Christ, and Christ abides in the believer. It’s a two way endeavor. A partnership. A relationship. JOHN 15:3 “YOU ARE ALREADY CLEAN because of the word I have spoken to you. Abide in me, and I in you…” V 5 “ … for without me you can do nothing. If anyone does not abide in Me, he is cast out as a branch and is withered and they gather them and throw them into the fire and they are burned.” And, who are the ones who abide in Christ? It is the believers. Unbelievers do not abide in Christ and they suffer a consequence. Believers reside in Him and He does the ‘work’ of guiding us, strengthening us, perfecting us daily, incrementally. He never stops. PHIL. 1:6. “… being CONFIDENT in this, that He who began a good work in you will carry it on to completion until the day of Christ Jesus.” Aren’t you confident that as a believer no one will snatch you out of Christ’s hand, or the Father’s hand? Did Christ lie? How did orthodoxy save you from yourself? Does it reflect the first century, authentic church? It seems you have been searching for spiritual truth. “Seek and you shall find.” It was not orthodoxy who saved you from yourself. It was the hand of the Lord who heard your voice as part of His sheep. “And, no one will snatch them out of My hand, AND THEY SHALL NEVER PERISH.” Once saved, always saved. Christ said it Himself.

[@adonisjryoutubr5025]

Just thought I'd mention here that St. Augustine did teach some Calvinistic ideas but retracted these ideas later in his life. If a Protestant is leaning on Augustine to support their Calvinistic beliefs, they are refuted by Augustine in his book "Retractions". No win situation for the Prots

[@randomname2366]

I am a true blood non-denominational christian. I can appreciate the arguments both men are discussing and there is definitely nuance in these sorts of discussions. I have debated with friends about how Sola scriptura is not found in scripture or church history but I also try to test every single thing I can up against scripture. I am a beneficiary of catholic, orthodox and protestant traditions and I am not ashamed of that one bit. I struggle with the fact that I do disagree with each major tradition on at least some issue and my commitment to following the truth as I can best see it has left me a bit homeless sadly. That being said my faith is so real and vibrant and I am willing to enjoy corporate worship in any setting so I feel at home in a Catholic church or some rock and roll evangelical church. I just love God so much that I rather have unity in worship and cordial disputes afterwards. Thanks for the great video!

[@l21n18]

No such thing as a true blood no -denominational Christian, that’s a delusion

[@dynamic9016]

Thanks much for this video.

[@georgwagner937]

"Pope Francis said in an interview published on Tuesday that he told the leader of Germany’s Catholic bishops that the country already had “a very good Evangelical Church” and “we don’t need two.”" We're a church now, not a sect or ecclesiastical community. And we are one! The pope said it! Yippie!!!

[@pepehaydn7039]

The Pope May say whatever he Whishes but all protestants are heretics and their heresies are diabólical.

[@Aldegundis]

Hey, is anyone else wondering why there is a KZbin context box here? Is KZbin just doing free advertising for Wikipedia now?

[@emilesturt3377]

Lovely to see these two generally and respectfully working together representing the ancient traditions without having to toyally agree with each other as Eastern and Roman

[@l21n18]

Maybe but “deceived by a demon” like there’s a certain amount of kookiness in that statement, can’t one have honest intellectual disagreement?

[@jimbojackson4045]

Does anyone know a reliable and unbiased source (preferably a KZbin channel) for learning about the early church leaders? I hear all these names and commentaries attributed to them but have no clue how I could verify it or learn more than the soundbite given.

[@KappaTheta11]

Trent, have you heard of Douglas Wilson? If you do have you thought about debating with him?

[@KappaTheta11]

@YAJUN YUAN Conservative Pastor out of Moscow, ID

[@JeansiByxan]

That would be cool.

[@kirstenfondren9226]

Great convo

[@cobra2326]

I’m Protestant because: 1. I believe in the priesthood of all believers (1 Peter 2) 2. I believe in direct access to Jesus for forgiveness (1 John 2). I went to Jesus directly for salvation, why do I need a priest for forgiveness? This also ties in with point 1. 3. I believe that salvation is through Christ alone. (John 3, Rom 3, Rom 8, etc) Belonging to (or baptism into) a specific church is unnecessary. The church is the body of Christ, composed of all who have truly trusted in Jesus for forgiveness of their sins. There are many other reasons, but I’ll stop there. There are also many more reasons I’m not specifically Catholic, but since that’s addressed in this video, I won’t list them.

[@koppite9600]

What are you protesting about? All 3 are found in the Catholic Church

[@Catholic1391]

Why am Catholic kzbin.info/www/bejne/hXyXc5J3jZxri5o

[@tryingnottobeasmartass757]

Both the Catholic and Orthodox Churches believe in, acknowledge, teach, and proclaim the priesthood of all believers. In fact, the priesthood of believers wasn't that something that was introduced after Christ's death, burial, and Resurrection. The passage in I Peter is quoting Exodus 19:5-6. In this passage, we learn that all the children of Israel were priests. The priesthood of all believers has always been true. The fact that all Christians are priests does not mean that there is not still a ministerial priesthood, any more than the fact that every Israelite was a priest meant that there was a ministerial priesthood.

[@VinnyZoomer]

I was just skimming through this video to see if I’ve heard the orthodox guy talk before and it took me forever, Trent talks so much lmao.

[@MrPanchoak]

Thank you both. I've thoroughly enjoyed this. Non combative fruitful respectful love for each other. This will heal our schism.

[@batmaninc2793]

Trent, nice shirt.

[@nicoleyoshihara4011]

I like hearing the other sides too. But I am Catholic and love my Catholicism 🙏❤💕

[@JaySeamus]

I've seen Jay Dyer respond to your rebuttal to his '10 Reasons Why Im Not Catholic'. I know you don't do rebuttals to rebuttals, but im just giving everyone a heads up.

[@krishnarjunmukherjee7987]

Dyer absolutely destroyed Horn

[@J_Chaucer]

Lol dyer is pushing people away from orthodoxy

[@Fasolislithuan]

@@krishnarjunmukherjee7987 I think Dyer is an excellent catholic apologist. I admire his work. Only James White is coming more people to the Catholic Church

[@theperegrinecatholic2892]

Dyer has the conduct of a rabid Protestant. I agree with Trent that Dyer is unprofessional and uncharitable.

[@Christian_Conservative]

@@krishnarjunmukherjee7987 I’m OO and happily found Jay Dyer on my way inquiring EO, thanks to God, I stayed OO.

[@LuminousTwinHearts]

I would like to see Trent Horn vs John MacArthur debate, regarding who is the real Christian? Catholics or Protestant...

[@chipmastermorris]

I'd like to hear about Anglicans who tend, I think? to be closer to Catholics rather than the easier protestant targets who are a bit more wacky.

[@annb9029]

I’m Catholic but want to attend a Anglican Ordinariate church some day they are in communion with Catholics

[@Constantinos_Is_Dead]

Nothing new to hear about them, really. There is a misconception that the Anglicans are the ones closer to the historical traditions than other Protestants, but that's not the case. Anglican theology is Calvinist (if anything, because there is such a wide variety of Anglican traditions that it is nearly impossible to know what a given parish believes), it doesn't matter if they have a supposed "apostolic succession" if the essential dogmas they adhere to are contrary to this apostolic heritage.

[@tinadavy3990]

King Henry VIII ??? SAD.

[@jordangeorge7582]

Love your videos Trent, but you HAVE to figure out the aspect ratio on your videos - the wonky, squished effect drives me crazy lol.

[@andrewculbreth7302]

The complete butchering of speaking in tongues was interesting. Always wondered what Orthodox thought about that.

[@gregorybarrett4998]

Hi, Andrew. Yes, it was interesting to get Craig's take on glossalalia. I wouldn't go so far as to call it butchering, though. Historically, there have been several ideas of what is to be understood both of the charismatic gift in the first place and of its rarefaction in the second place. Saints have grappled with it, coming to a similar explanation of a universally observed phenomenon: the cessation of glossalalia as a common and universally recognized charismatic gift in the Church. Though it has never altogether disappeared as a charismatic gift producing the effects described in Scripture, its rarefaction came to be explained in the universal dissemination of the Church, and its incorporation in the liturgy.

[@andrewculbreth7302]

@@gregorybarrett4998 well that's fascinating. I have nothing of substance to offer but I will have to look into that. Appreciate the new information.

[@gregorybarrett4998]

@YAJUN YUAN Hi, Yuan. Thanks for the question, as it provides occasion for clarification. Various forms of the liturgy are expressed in languages distinct from that of the main corpus of the liturgy. This is done for several reasons, including to honour the memory of historical contributions of respective language bodies in the mission of the Church, and to intimate the universality of the Church as reflected in the universality of the languages, cultures, peoples and nations represented.

[@iVideosTech]

Sounds like Craig cites James 5:16 for confession to the elders, but my Greek has it as to "allelon" meaning one another. Am I misunderstanding Craig?

[@jonphinguyen]

I do not support or think Charismatic "Catholicism" should be endorsed or supported in any way.

[@printedmarble6985]

I'm not a Charismatic but it's real and it's endorsed and supported by the Church. I went to a course hosted by my church and it was about this and during mass near the end when we were doing the praying they also mentioned the course and we prayed for everyone who was attending, so it's official teaching. Now that doesn't mean some people go waaaay too far and do these things improperly and without care to the actual doctrine of the church

[@catkat740]

What do you think happened in Acts 2? We are and, of course, should be a Charismatic Church!

[@tinadavy3990]

ABSOLUTELY. Since when ?

[@Rooted_In_Christos]

Would it make sense to say the sin of schism is a doctrinal sin of rejecting apostolic succession ?

[@rhwinner]

There is no need to accuse Protestants of being under the rule of Beelzebub; simple logic will suffice.

[@JeansiByxan]

What? Did Trent say they're under the rule of Beelzebub.

[@davidjanbaz7728]

Simpleton logic is all you got !

[@Ellie-wf9sq]

I went to check out a catholic school for my kids recently. Although a practicing evangelical Christian myself, I’ve never had any personal objections to Catholicism as a whole, so I thought why not, we don’t like our current school let’s try this one. The principal of the school, who told us she was raised catholic and went to catholic school, emphasized proudly that their uniforms were non gendered. I.e. the boys can wear skirts if they would like. When one of the parents asked, so is a boy wearing a skirt allowed to use the girls restroom, she said “we’ve never had a problem with kids using the correct restroom” and then quickly backtracked to say “not that there is a correct restroom, I don’t want to say that”. At the end of the day, sadly, this has been my experience with Catholicism. I probably would be catholic if it wasn’t for the fact that so many Catholics I meet are more “schismatic” in their beliefs than the average Protestant I meet. I would rather have my kids go to a secular school and be told this stuff, and I can combat it with “well they don’t have Jesus so of course they think differently than we do” But what do I do when it’s coming from another “Christian”? All my aunts and uncles are Catholic…out of all my 9 cousins, only one still goes to church regularly, and that’s only after not going to church for decades. Converting to evangelical Protestantism brought him back to church. Both me and my brother, the only ones raised Protestant, go to church on a regular basis and have all our lives. If I felt like the Catholic Church would do a good job teaching my kids to love Jesus, I would be Catholic in a heartbeat. It’s hard for me to hear a catholic calling me schismatic when I just want what’s best for my kids and the Catholic Church isn’t giving it to me. Is it possible that Protestants are not the only ones who need to repent of the “sin of schism?”. Not trying to sound rude, I’m genuinely trying to think through if I am guilty of this, but I also genuinely just want what’s best for my kids…

[@geoffjs]

I sympathise with you & the effect of secularism on Catholics. My only other comment is that flawed humans don’t detract from the Truth of the Catholic Church.

[@gideondavid30]

9:00 Trent says that it is fatal to use the argument from silence to criticize Catholic doctrine seeing as Protestants have newly created doctrine like Eternal Security. I see his point, but the difference is Rome has every difficult time justifying its doctrine because they are normally found outside of scripture (Sacred Traditions, Apocrypha, etc). At least with those who believe in Protestant doctrines like Eternal Security (I don't believe the doctrine), arguments are made from scripture. Rome's default is to appeal to papal infallibility and the magisterium if scriptural evidence is insufficient.

[@misterkittyandfriends1441]

Eternal security isn't very convincing since most people don't accept it... not to mention the very direct rebukes to the idea in scripture (but I am sure it feels nice). Catholics only have problems arguing doctrines outside of scripture for people who don't accept tradition and history. If someone cannot accept the same source of authority then there will be issues flowing from that.... but really, Trents explanation of the gap between mere christianity and mere protestantism is not a gap most people can be crossed. Protestantism cannot rationalize itself, so what are arguments built on top of it?

[@gideondavid30]

@@misterkittyandfriends1441 The point is argument from silence is warranted when your doctrine has no evidence for it. Eternal Security can be argued from scripture, but I am no longer convinced of it anymore. Mere Christianity as a I understand it is the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Protestant and Catholic both teach it. The issue today though is what constitutes a protestant.

[@misterkittyandfriends1441]

@@gideondavid30 From the Catholic POV it is not a silence problem but a selective hearing problem. It's not that there's no rationale for catholic teachings, its just that those voices are rejected absolutely within the protestant mindset as verbal teaching / history or if they are in the unified christian bible from Nicene to 1600 then they are scripturally demoted to "apocrypha" so they can be rejected. There is no expectation that all revelation resides in scripture (specifically the limited protestant bible), and obviously relying on scripture alone can lead to heresy.

[@tafazzi-on-discord]

>apocrypha >outside of scripture The jokes write themselves

[@gideondavid30]

@@misterkittyandfriends1441 The Marian Dogmas are not found in the Apocrypha. Sure Purgatory arguably is. Their is nothing selective about it. You cannot bind a Christian's salvation to a dogma that wasn't taught in the first 400 years of church history and has no firm basis in scripture. I get it it boils down to an authority conflict, but Rome fails 200 percent to justify the Marian Dogmas on anything other than traditions without evidence or vague interpretations (typologies). Arguments from silence do matter especially on Dogmas and core doctrines.

[@alexjurado6029]

I really like Craig Truglia. I would’ve liked to have heard Trent talk a little bit here too 👀 lol. I kid, I kid..

[@alexjurado6029]

@@Xymage He’s very knowledgeable about ancient Christianity and has tons of very strong arguments against Protestantism.

[@lynnaweston2174]

My understanding is that the Eastern Orthodox Church and the Catholic Church were one church until it split into two churches in 1054. This is a Schism.

[@josephmoya5098]

That's a vast oversimplification. Christians in the middle east routinely communed with both the Orthodox and Catholics up to the 18th century.

[@cactoidjim1477]

Some EO and OO Churches *have* come back. These are the Eastern Rites.

[@misterkittyandfriends1441]

Yep, and it was bad and people did it for bad reasons. But the EO and Catholics have been working toward reconciliation. Both agree that their priestly orders are valid, etc. The theological differences are relatively minor compared to the variety of protestantism which has wildly different theology and authority structures. Protestants routinely reject the idea of a real, external authority, and collect like minded people rather than conforming, as Trent notes.

[@danielhaas9469]

@@misterkittyandfriends1441 this is false. RCC and all others have disputes too. Many RCC rejected the Marian dogmas etc. What frustrates me is most of you have no idea why the reformation took place nor have an understanding of the massive corruption on a macro scale. It wasn't as if only a few bad bishops or pipes at the time created the reformation. But massive control, manipulation, financial corruption, executions who disagreed with Rome or the State.

[@lynnaweston2174]

It is still a Schism. A division. Many, not all but many, Protestants commune with each other trying to overcome differences. There was and in some ways still a separation between the Eastern Orthodox and Catholic Church. Your son of schism is no less a sin than the sin of schism created by Luther. Both schisms caused rifts in the church as a whole. But the big question here is, as the other Speaker (I'm sorry I forget his name) quickly pointed out that, one of the two churches debating today is morally wrong and as split was caused by demonic influence. So of the two churches that were debating today, Eastern Orthodox and Catholic, which is the original church? The point is, if a Catholic went to an Eastern Orthodox Church would they be permitted to take communion or the other way around? Which one is the true original church? It can not be both?

[@GeekyGeckoCreations]

Paul assumed the office without authority in Galatians 1

[@koppite9600]

But he should know there aren't two churches, theres one Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church of Pope Francis.

[@pennsyltuckyreb9800]

"Of Pope Francis"??? Popes come and go, bud. They're just men. You mean of THE LORD JESUS CHRIST. Anyway, PF is not a true Pope....but that's just my conclusion I've come to over through years. I'm a Sedevacantist type. Holy Mother Church hasn't had a real Pope since 1958.

[@calson814]

@@pennsyltuckyreb9800 i agree with you, yes Popes come and go. However I disagree with your claim that the Church haven't had a real Pope. Jesus promised to be with His Church to the end of days.

[@brittoncain5090]

@@pennsyltuckyreb9800 So I guess Jesus was lying when He said the gates of hell won't overcome the Church?

[@MelaniesManicures]

Not of Pope Francis.

[@pennsyltuckyreb9800]

@@brittoncain5090 ...🤦‍♂️ It's like the same exact response from you folks every time. Firstly, where does it say anywhere if the Chair of St. Peter is vacant, the gates of hell have prevailed??? That promise of our Lord was for the CHURCH, not the papacy. If we go by your logic, then the gates of hell HAVE prevailed against the Church many times over in Church history.... "May God console you! ...What saddens you ...is the fact that others have occupied the churches by violence, while during this time you are on the outside. It is a fact that they have the premises─but you have the apostolic Faith. They can occupy our churches, but they are outside the true Faith. You remain outside the places of worship, but the Faith dwells within you. Let us consider: what is more important, the place or the Faith? The true Faith, obviously. Who has lost and who has won in this struggle-the one who keeps the premises or the one who keeps the Faith? True, the premises are good when the apostolic Faith is preached there; they are holy if everything takes place there in a holy way ... You are the ones who are happy: you who remain within the church by your faith, who hold firmly to the foundations of the Faith which has come down to you from apostolic Tradition. And if an execrable jealousy has tried to shake it on a number of occasions, it has not succeeded. They are the ones who have broken away from it in the present crisis. No one, ever, will prevail against your faith, beloved brothers. And we believe that God will give us our churches back some day. Thus, the more violently they try to occupy the places of worship, the more they separate themselves from the Church. They claim that they represent the Church; but in reality, they are the ones who are expelling themselves from it and going astray. Even if Catholics faithful to Tradition are reduced to a handful, they are the ones who are the true Church of Jesus Christ." ~ St. Athanasius, 4th century

[@davide.patterson6462]

Hi Trent, You are absolutely right that using the term Protestantism to describe what we conventionally call Protestantism. But that doesn't mean that an artificial terminology wouldn't be useful just to distinguish what is going on. Although Protestantism has one name, it's not one traditional or even one family of traditions. The First and Second Great Awakenings were as violent a reaction against Protestantism as the Reformation was against Medieval Catholicism. Likewise, the Azusa Street Revival that gave birth to Pentacostalism is a whole different kettle of fish. Personally, I don't believe that using the term Protestantism to describe Christianity in the United States after the Federalist period is entirely accurate. However, there is cross-pollination in American Christianity from European Protestantism in the mid and late 19th Century because American denominations self identified as Protestant. This relationship is especially true with English Non-conformist traditions. However, how American Christianity synthesized religious ideas it took from European Protestantism is fundamentally different in almost every case. I think it is useful to think of American Christianity as being an outgrowth of 19th Century Evangelicalism. Bebbington's Quadrilateral can be seen (or some evolution of it) in almost all homegrown American denominations. If one wants to divide American Christianity into several broad families, I think Liberal Mainline, Neo Evangelical-Fundamentalism, Millarist, Pentecostal, and other (Catholic, Amish, European style Protestantism, etc.) might properly reflect the current religious landscape in the United States. I think you can find a better representative of the Neo-Evangelical-Fundamentalist tradition than James White. You reference him too frequently. I find James White intellectually dishonest. Any of his work on patristics is nowhere near the quality of, as one example, Rowan Williams's work on Augustine. White is not a serious theologian, and by extension, he does great harm to his own cause. Cultural and social divide intertwined with religious traditions in the US makes a certain level of intellectual curiosity uncommon in that tradition, but there are some good scholars that believe in the same faith.

[@patdainel9037]

Being a Protestant is like drinking non alcoholic beer. Yeh it tastes alright but it lacks substance, body, depth.

[@williammcenaney1331]

Missouri Synod Lutherans confess their sins to each other when their ministers aren't there to hear them. That worries me because a Protestant minister admitted that he blabbed to his wife after he counseled me. How do Missouri Synod Lutherans know that other parishioners will keep confessions confidential? Besides that, Catholic priests and Eastern Orthodox one are the only ones who receive Holy Orders. Anglican and Episcopalian clergy believe they're priests. But Catholics know Pope Leo XIII said they don't have the Sacrament of Holy Orders. If he's right, that suggests that they're laymen wearing Roman collars, and they can't absolve anyone validly.

[@bobdobbs943]

When i was a protestant i remembered everything and my mind worked fine. When i became a catholic my mind all of a sudden turned into oatmeal and i needed statues and images to remind me that there is a god. Otherwise id forget.

[@redneckpride4ever]

Sounds like when God had 2 cherubim put onto the Ark. He knew that the founded Jewish religion he was establishing would cause people to forget angels existed. So, what was your father's nickname for you as a child? Schmuck or Putz?

[@davidcole333]

Thank you for adding absolutely NOTHING to the conversation.

[@LM-jz9vh]

*The Enuma Elish would later be the inspiration for the Hebrew scribes who created the text now known as the biblical Book of Genesis.* Prior to the 19th century CE, the Bible was considered the oldest book in the world and its narratives were thought to be completely original. In the mid-19th century CE, however, European museums, as well as academic and religious institutions, sponsored excavations in Mesopotamia to find physical evidence for historical corroboration of the stories in the Bible. ***These excavations found quite the opposite, however, in that, once cuneiform was translated, it was understood that a number of biblical narratives were Mesopotamian in origin.*** *Famous stories such as the Fall of Man and the Great Flood were originally conceived and written down in Sumer,* translated and modified later in Babylon, and reworked by the Assyrians ***before they were used by the Hebrew scribes for the versions which appear in the Bible.*** ***In revising the Mesopotamian creation story for their own ends, the Hebrew scribes tightened the narrative and the focus but retained the concept of the all-powerful deity who brings order from chaos.*** Marduk, in the Enuma Elish, establishes the recognizable order of the world - *just as God does in the Genesis tale* - and human beings are expected to recognize this great gift and honor the deity through service. Google *"Enuma Elish - The Babylonian Epic of Creation - Full Text - World History Encyclopedia"* Also discussed by Professor Christine Hayes at Yale University in her first lecture of the series on the Hebrew Bible from approx. 8:50. ------------------------------------------------------------------ Also, look up the below articles. *"Debunking the Devil - Michael A. Sherlock (Author)"* *"**ExChristian.Net** - Articles: The Bible: Primitive Nonsense"* *"10 Ways The Bible Was Influenced By Other Religions - Listverse"* *"Top Ten Reasons Noah’s Flood is Mythology - The Sensuous Curmudgeon"* *"Reasons for disbelief: The top ten reasons I am an atheist - Real Bible Stories"* (Written by a former minister) *"Secular Societies Fare Better Than Religious Societies - Psychology Today"* *"**ExChristian.Net** - Articles: The Bible - Is it the Word of GOD?"* *"The Adam and Eve myth - News24"* *"Some Reasons Why Humanists Reject The Bible - American Humanist Association"* *"The origins of the Ten Commandments - Carpe Scriptura"* *"Does the Ipuwer Papyrus Refer to the Biblical Exodus Account? - Bishop's Encyclopedia of Religion, Society and Philosophy"* *"Before Adam and Eve - Psychology Today"* *"The Problem of the Bible: Inaccuracies, contradictions, fallacies, scientific issues and more. - News24"* *"Gilgamesh vs. Noah - Wordpress"* *"40 Problems with Christianity - Hemant Mehta - Friendly Atheist - Patheos"* *"The Problem With Faith: 11 Ways Religion Is Destroying Humanity"* *"Retired bishop explains the reason why the Church invented "Hell""* *"You Need To Consider The Possibility Your Religion Is Mythology"* *"No, Humans Are Probably Not All Descended From A Single Couple Who Lived 200,000 Years Ago"* *"Adam & Eve: Theologians Try to Reconcile Science and Fail - The New Republic"* *"Adam and Eve: the ultimate standoff between science and faith (and a contest!) - Why Evolution Is True"* *"Bogus accommodationism: The return of Adam and Eve as real people, as proposed by a wonky quasi-scientific theory - Why Evolution Is True"* *"Old Testament Tales Were Stolen From Other Cultures - Griffin"* *"Parallelism between “The Hymn to Aten” and Psalm 104 - Project Augustine"* *"Contradictions in the Bible | Identified verse by verse and explained using the most up-to-date scholarly information about the Bible, its texts, and the men who wrote them -- by Dr. Steven DiMattei"* *"How do we know that the biblical writers were* ***not*** *writing history? -- by Dr Steven DiMattei"*

[@Pete_B_773]

So much easily reputable talking points in the video, but the biggest one, was when Craig stated that what drawn him to the Orthodox church was the passage on schism. Yet the Orthodox is based on the schism of 1054!!

[@Kingfish179]

Rome left. All the other Patriarchates (Alexandria, Antioch, Jerusalem, Constantinople) remained Orthodox and still retain the orthodox faith to this day.

[@Pete_B_773]

@@Kingfish179 so Horn is the schismatic heretic

[@Kingfish179]

@@Pete_B_773 he is a member of a heretical body, yes. On a personal level, he seems decent and I appreciate some of his apologetics against atheists and Protestants

[@tafazzi-on-discord]

@@Pete_B_773 I don't think the general orthodox consensus is to consider catholics "heretics"

[@Cklert]

@@Kingfish179 No. The Patriarchs of Alexandria and Antioch were non-Chalcedonian and were already split centuries before the Western and Eastern Schism. In fact, Antioch in particular went through multiple schisms. It's See is still to this day, a mess. The Eastern Church may claim a Patriarch of those Sees, but it's quite complex to actually point out the valid successor. Jerusalem was under Muslim invasion and pre-occupied and never weighed in until after both sides excommunicated each other. The Great Schism was primarily an issue between Rome and Constantinople. I generally have no idea why Orthodox make up the lie that it was a 1 v 4 decision when in reality it was 1 vs 1 and a half at best.

[@Ampwich]

James 5 says to confess your sins to EACH OTHER not to priests or elders. Though it does say to go to elders if you're sick

[@randycarson9812]

Isn't that verse in the context of calling the elders for prayer? Yes, it is.

[@aloyalcatholic5785]

Craig Truglia is probably my "favorite" Eastern Orthodox apologst.

[@dwong9289]

Kabane and Craig

[@tommytanumihardja9415]

Part of the body which run disorganized, unchecked, seems like cancer, gangrenous part, or like a seizure .

[@JeansiByxan]

Some people are Protestants because they were born into a Protestant family and won't switch on a dime, such as myself. Some are Protestant because of their location in a country or region; some are because of historical objections, some are because of the Reformation and the heinous acts of the RCC before then; some are because of misunderstandings; some are because of convictions in one particular area. That Trent would characterize all Protestants as irrational is grossly misleading. It is so disappointing to see a self-proclaimed Christian set up straw men like this.

[@ponti5882]

The reasons you listed would all seem to fall under the “uncritical” category to be honest.

[@JeansiByxan]

@@ponti5882 I hesitated about the word "uncritical". I suppose irrational is what I was going for. I edited it.

[@leannehornecker4128]

I grew up Assemblies of God and have since become Anglican. Do you have a video with an A/G person who has left?

[@youtubecharlie1]

Why is your video warped?

[@GopnikVlad]

If any charismatic fella can start a strip mall "church", then that is chaos. Christ came from a certain tradition and the church fathers continued those reverent worship practices within a bishop structure, not unlike Moses et all before him.

[@TheGreekCatholic]

It’s a bit hard to fathom why a non Eastern European would be orthodox rather than catholic . This is coming from a Greek convert to the Catholic Church! Yes confession was public where it was said aloud to the whole congregation. Nevertheless, the priest would make the decision if it was contrite and meaningful. This caused public scandal so confession became private but in no way does it negate the form of confession

[@Godfrey118]

It's probably time for the term "Protestant" to be put away. Each denomination should be referenced separately. A Lutheran is monumentally different than a reformed Baptist, and it's a shame that they get lumped together as "Protestants"

[@tinadavy3990]

YES... it is alllllllll problematic.

[@James_Wisniewski]

For me, my biggest problem with Protestantism is the fact that it's inconsistent, specifically on Sola Scriptura. You look at the words and the obvious assumption is that they mean they believe that only Scripture can be used for teaching on matters of doctrine. Then, you look at what they actually do, and they're appealing to Church Fathers and Confessions of Faith and celebrity pastors and theologians, on top of Scripture. So, which is it? No two Protestants can seem to agree on what Sola Scriptura actually means. If you're appealing to other sources, you're implicitly admitting that Scripture isn't sufficient to you. Even the "Me and my Bible" crowd, who don't appeal to the Fathers or Confessions, still appeal to pastors and theologians, or even just their specific pastor, or at least just parrot their talking points even if they don't cite their sources. It's almost like you need authorities besides just Scripture to act as guard rails against bad Scriptural takes. At least Catholics and Orthodox are honest about it.

[@weast6388]

So I'm a Protestant, I attend a pentecostal church but theologically I'd be classified as a charasmatic Methodist. But I do think you're right. I try to keep away from other people's interpretations of scripture. I don't set what someone else says as being in stone. I just let scripture talk. I think a big problem we have is that people want the "deeper" meaning, scripture is very plain and very easy to understand in a good translation.

[@geoffjs]

@@weast6388Point well made, however, you are still dependent on subjective personal interpretation & other heresies like sola Scriptura & sola fide.

[@weast6388]

@@geoffjs ‭Ephesians 2:4-6 DRC1752‬ [4] But God, (who is rich in mercy,) for his exceeding charity wherewith he loved us,[5] Even when we were dead in sins, hath quickened us together in Christ, (by whose grace you are saved,)[6] And hath raised us up together, and hath made us sit together in the heavenly places, through Christ Jesus. I just read the text and take it as authoritative. These are words from the mind of Paul the Apostle, inspired by the Holy Spirit, it's through Christ and faith in Him we are saved. I have no issue in having the church be an authority, but it can't be above scripture. The Bible is the founding documents on which the church bases all doctrine and judges all.

[@williammcenaney1331]

How ironic. In the NKJV, a Protestant Bible, a note says the Bible condemns sectarianism when each Protestant denomination is a sect.

[@georgeluke6382]

Romans 10:9 seems a different confession than 1 John 1:9. I don't disagree they're connected- but it seems a presuppositional argument to say that the regular public confession of Jesus as Lord (over Caesar as the Lord) of Romans 10:9 is less the essence of salvation than the regular confession of one's own sins in the context of the church. That said, consider these: We dream not of a faith which is devoid of good works, nor of a justification which can exist without them: the only difference is, that while we acknowledge that faith and works are necessarily connected, we, however, place justification in faith, not in works. How this is done is easily explained, if we turn to Christ only, to whom our faith is directed and from whom it derives all its power. Why, then, are we justified by faith? Because by faith we apprehend the righteousness of Christ, which alone reconciles us to God. This faith, however, you cannot apprehend without at the same time apprehending sanctification; for Christ “is made unto us wisdom, and righteousness, and sanctification, and redemption,” (1 Cor. 1:30). Christ, therefore, justifies no man without also sanctifying him. These blessings are conjoined by a perpetual and inseparable tie. Those whom he enlightens by his wisdom he redeems; whom he redeems he justifies; whom he justifies he sanctifies. But as the question relates only to justification and sanctification, to them let us confine ourselves. Though we distinguish between them, they are both inseparably comprehended in Christ. Would ye then obtain justification in Christ? You must previously possess Christ. But you cannot possess him without being made a partaker of his sanctification: for Christ cannot be divided. Since the Lord, therefore, does not grant us the enjoyment of these blessings without bestowing himself, he bestows both at once but never the one without the other. Thus it appears how true it is that we are justified not without, and yet not by works, since in the participation of Christ, by which we are justified, is contained not less sanctification than justification. - Cited from John Calvin’s The Institutes of the Christian Religion (Bellingham, WA: Logos Bible Software, 1997), book III, chapter 16, section 1. Emphasis added. I reply to the argument, then, that our obedience is necessary for salvation. It is, therefore, a partial cause of our justification. Many things are necessary which are not a cause and do not justify, as for instance the earth is necessary, and yet it does not justify. If man the sinner wants to be saved, he must necessarily be present, just as he asserts that I must also be present. What Augustine says is true, “He who has created you without you will not save you without you.”1 Works are necessary to salvation, but they do not cause salvation, because faith alone gives life. On account of the hypocrites we must say that good works are necessary to salvation. It is necessary to work. Nevertheless, it does not follow that works save on that account, unless we understand necessity very clearly as the necessity that there must be an inward and outward salvation or righteousness. Works save outwardly, that is, they show evidence that we are righteous and that there is faith in a man which saves inwardly, as Paul says, “Man believes with his heart and so is justified, and he confesses with his lips and so is saved” [Rom. 10:10]. Outward salvation shows faith to be present, just as fruit shows a tree to be good. “THE DISPUTATION CONCERNING JUSTIFICATION,” LW, 165. [Luther]

[@georgeluke6382]

The point of the quotes is the best of the Calvin and Luther are careful here and it's to show that justification by faith alone, didn't remove the necessity of union with Christ, or the necessary living nature of our faith manifest in works. On the necessity of offering communion, unction, confession, baptism- totally agree. But Hughes Oliphant Old and Jeff Meyers show a careful liturgy is definitely a concern among Reformed polities.

[@Narikku]

Hey Trent, to answer the question as to why I am Protestant, it's honestly a very simple answer. 1.) I am convinced that, as a Protestant, I am serving God in a manner that is acceptable and pleasing to Him and am considered faithful. Because of faith, I will be recipient of the promises laid out in His word. As to why I am not *anything else,* then answer is simple. 2.) I am not convinced that by converting to Catholicism, Orthodoxy, or some other form of Christendom, I will be able to better serve God. Those are the two central reasons. In order for your arguments to be effectice for me, one of the following would need to be demostrated. Either: 1.) Being a Protestant implies that I am not a faithful servant of God. 2.) Converting to Catholicism, Orthodoxy, or some other form of Christendom would allow me to better serve God. As to reasons why I am *convinced,* I'd be happy to express that as well. But ultimately, the reason I am a Protestant is because I am convinced to be a Protestant.

[@信者の男]

well, if you're one of those "Jesus sinned" "Jesus is trans" "Paul is bigotted" kind of Protestant I am afraid you're in big danger/heresy. You should narrow it down a bit.

[@Narikku]

@@信者の男 I am none of those things. (:

[@Narikku]

@@信者の男 How would you like me to narrow it down? I am not any of those. (:

[@geoffjs]

I understand your situation but prompt you to consider why man made 500 yr old Protestantism with its 000’s of sects & lack of unity & authoritative interpreter is better than His One True Church with 2000 yr track record which has the fullness of Truth. Knowingly rejecting the CC puts your salvation at risk, as Faith alone is unbiblical & insufficient

[@Narikku]

@@geoffjs If I was truly convinced that the Catholic Church was the "One True Church" then I would accept it, my friend. I can tell you that I desire to serve God. Whether or not you believe that is up to you. I understand that the RCC believes that my salvation is at risk if I am not a part of it. That does very little to change my mind. This only matters if it is true that *God* also feels the same way. I do not fear hell. I do not fear men that can kill the flesh. I fear God who can kill the soul. And I believe that I am doing what the LORD has commanded me. Now, I may be wrong, in which case I pray the LORD corrects me. But until I am convinced otherwise, I will do what I believe the LORD is guiding me to. This is the same as any Catholic: the difference is the Catholic believes that the LORD speaks through the RCC. I'm not convinced that is true. Does that make sense, my friend?

[@MrEvoXI]

You need to sit down with Jay. It will be a really good show late night stream

[@ZZZELCH]

THIS is how we bring unity and communion over time. We need to build on what we agree on (which is a staggering amount). Then, we can get into the Papacy, Immaculate Conception, Original Sin vs Ancestral Curse, Councils, etc. We need to learn to laugh with and at one another. Very entertaining video.

[@metrx330]

I became Protestant because of the abuse I suffered as a Catholic. The priest was just shuffled off to another state. But what really hurt is that I was basically blamed for what happened. I hope God is in a good mood towards the Church of Rome come judgement day.

[@kwazooplayingguardsman5615]

That is unfortunate that the moral failure of man caused you to leave Truth.

[@ThatGuy-nr5sp]

The moral failure of man, doesn’t the church try to cover all this up.

[@tinadavy3990]

I am Catholic... it needs to be addressed.

[@guidohlizzi06]

I was raised a Protestant and lived most of my life the missionary field on China. I've become a Catholic for all these reasons. Literally.

[@TheCounselofTrent]

Wow! Thank you so much for sharing! -Vanessa

[@guidohlizzi06]

​@@TheCounselofTrentoh. My pleasure. Thanks for replying. Trent Horn had been a huge influence in my life. His debates with James White literally flipped my mind. I thank God for his life.

[@ianpardue2615]

From a high church Protestant, the sect thingamajig reminded me of Diotrephes from 3 John.

[@jbtex784]

Evangelical here: Where exactly does it say to confess your sins to a priest or elder? James says to confess to one another. As for examples: Daniel confessed to God, so did Moses. Also Solomon.

[@tryingnottobeasmartass757]

Every Catholic and Orthodox Christian also confesses to God. But there is not a single Bible verse that says to confess only to God. Also, the New Testament was written within the context of a Church that was practicing the sacrament of confession. When the early readers of James read that passage, they knew exactly what James was saying to do because it was something they were practicing. In point of fact, though, the early Church did public confession. As time went on, the Church, using the authority to bind and loose which Christ delegated to Her, made confession private between the priest and the penitent.

[@teresacantu1184]

The priesthood was established with Moses and Aaron, so protestants can't claim that there is no or never was a priesthood. Even protestants like Joel Osteen call Jesus the High Priest. On Earth, Aaron was the High Priest, so the Old Explains the new. Catholicism has Jewish roots, that continue to today in Christianity and the one and only Catholic and Apostolic church, lead by the apostles themselves.

[@petertherock7340]

Protestantism = Rebellion. What are the fruits 🍉 of rebellion- schism, sectarianism, heresy, vice, and so on.

[@getgordonallen]

I'm Protestant and have not listened to the complete video yet, but part of the complaints I've heard so far are misleading to some extent. When most of your comparisons (not all of them) are to churches that line up with people like John MacArthur then you have a good case. People in MacArthur's camp would consider me a borderline heretic because of some of my beliefs. There are many Protestant churches that are very serious about communion, anointing with oil for healing, ect. It would be like looking at some of the stuff going on with the Catholic church in Germany and making a generalization for all the Catholic church.

[@joachim847]

There are charismatic Orthodox christians. Talk to your priest about it, don't disrupt the liturgy, and pray in front of icons at home 🙏

[@ChaseRoycroft]

So which of you is in Schism? 😛

[@TDL-xg5nn]

Protestant churches don't look like churches. They look like concert arenas and you go in and listen to rock music, some guy in a t-shirt and jeans gives a power point presentation on something from the bible, more rock music and waving their arms in the air. No thanks. The mass is holy, dignified, and sacred.