Depends on who you ask with the Catholics and Orthodox, most indigenous Orthodox layman see no reason why the two churches can't be united and its similar to Catholicism, the traditionalists of both movements (the ones who actually represent the historical positions of these churches) would take issue with compromise for the sake of unity.
For the internet Orthodox. Orthodox irl are much more chill towards Cathoics from my experiences. Most of the internet Orthodox online were American Protestants that converted to Orthodoxy and keep their anti Catholic zeal. Some really traditional Catholics are rabidly anti Orthodox also.
@@Cal20000As a Trad Latin Mass Catholic, I believe the Eastern Orthodox are brothers in Christ that separated and prots are ilillegitimate bastard half-breeds created from rapists 500 years ago.
Thank you-again-for all the hard work that went into this series. I've saved it to share with Catholic friends who insist that the Orthodox are "basically the same as us".
It's a false dichotomy which really undermines the value of these videos, as there is no Orthodox church that doesn't have a counterpart in the Catholic Church. The Roman church may indeed be different than any of one of the 17 autocephalous Orthodox churches, but no more than they of the other 24 sui iuris Catholic churches spread across five other liturgical rites. These differences already exist within Catholicism and don't pose a problem.
As an Orthodox Christian, I’ve enjoyed this series and I appreciate the fact that you make it clear that we have some very big and important differences with RCs. Most Orthodox use prayer ropes, not beads.
It's a false dichotomy which really undermines the value of these videos, as there is no Orthodox church that doesn't have a counterpart in the Catholic Church. The Roman church may indeed be different than any of one of the 17 autocephalous Orthodox churches, but no more than they of the other 24 sui iuris Catholic churches spread across five other liturgical rites. These differences already exist within Catholicism and don't pose a problem.
Completely disagree, the whole project was sunk by the flawed premise, as there is no "Orthodox Church" only Orthodox churches. In fact, there are 17 of them and they vary to some degree from one another. However, all these churches have a Catholic counterpart. This series is really more like the different between the Roman (Catholic) Church and other sui iuris churches that are also Catholic. Consequently, there is no Orthodox/Catholic dichotomy, only the spectrum of belief that exists with the Catholic church, some of which is shared with to varying extent with any of the autocephalous Orthodox churches.
Not all Catholics say the rosary or attend Stations. They're not obligated. And the Orthodox had a rosary that used the angelic salutation (1st half of the Hail Mary) dating back to the 8th Century. It obviously caught on more in the West, where it continues to be practiced today, than the East.
The first step in Catholic canonization is to be named a "Servant of God," which is a recognition of "heroic virtue" in the deceased faithful. The main difference between the Servants of God and the Venerable is a more rigorous level of review. Some Servants of God are Nicholas Black Elk, Dorothy Day, and Fr. Vincent Capodanno.
Great series! I thank God I was born in a time I could choose from an unbiased position which apostolic church to join, and that I am blessed to have more than one within driving distance.
Western rite Orthodox also pray the rosary. Nothing wrong with the rosary. It is very beautiful. St. John of Shanghai and San Francisco probably would also have agreed. As he helped to re-establish/re-awaken the western rite.
Although the Rosary is associated with Catholics, it is believed by some Orthodox to be originally an Orthodox form of prayer that fell out of common practice in the East, but was adopted by the West. Some trace it to the eighth century. One form of it comes from St. Seraphim of Sarov. There are 15 meditations, each accompanied by 10 Hail Mary's (Eastern version), followed by the Lord's Prayer and the Jesus Prayer.
As a Catholic, I pray the Rosary during the day as it takes some concentration on the mysteries. At night, when falling asleep, I'll pray the Orthodox Jesus prayer.
I'm so confused... a Catholic using an Orthodox cross, saying Christ is risen, when He hasn't yet (at least from the Eastern perspective, even for Uniates)... What is going on...?
@@St.MartinofToursPrayToGodForUs it's not an orthodox cross, it's an eastern cross and I attend a Byzantine Ruthenian Catholic Church. It is an eastern Catholic church in communion with Rome and follows the Gregorian calendar. Christ is risen!☦️🙏♥️
Christ is Risen, whether it was last week or yet to come when one venerates this blessed occasion matters less than the fact it happened and we are saved thereby. God be praised.
In our canon law which is a bit more universal than implied here, we are told not to prostrate on Sundays as it’s the day of Christ Holy Resurrection, however the Greek church has begun to do this in imitation of the Roman Catholics, they kneel, they don’t prostrate fully but it holds the same meaning
People having been make pilgrimages to the Holy Land since the time of the apostles, however the RC stations of the cross devotion emerged in the late middle ages as a sort of substitute for those who could not afford a pilgrimage to the Holy Land or when the Holy Land was not attainable due to Islamic colonization or occupation of Jerusalem (they still occupy the temple mount). The stations spread from Italy under the influence of the Franciscan friars and was thought for many years as a Franciscan church practice. Hence there were no stations of the cross in non-Franciscan parishes for a time, until due to a general popularization, the practice spread. It was also unknown in Northern Europe until after the Reformation. That is the reason why there are no stations in the medieval cathedrals of the Lutheran lands. There the images were not destroyed to a great extent as they were in Calvinistic countries, but there are no stations to be found as there were not any in the first place. They were added to RC churches that did not become Protestant in the Counter Reformation period. The claim that they were known for a millennium is therefore ridiculous, if not purposely misleading.
You touched on the Rosary but not on the Catholic devotion of chaplets i.e. Chaplet of the Divine Mercy etc., some of which are very popular. Another distinction you didn't include is that of wearing scapulars, such as the Brown Scapular and others. The way Marian apparitions have informed popular Catholic devotion versus the Orthodox who (basically) don't believe in Marian apparitions, though if you start to lift the veil there are a few locally accepted ones. But in the Catholic sphere, Fatima alone is so defining of Catholicism, yet only happened 100 years ago. Add Lourdes, Akita, and many more...and that's sort of what I love about the Catholic tradition. Despite the mystery and beauty of Orthodox worship, the Catholic Church is ever-changing, ever-new, yet still firmly rooted to Tradition (although of course the Orthodox would disagree...but that's how I see it). Responding to and engaging with the world in which is finds itself while still remaining Church.
The fact is, both orthodoxy and catholicism are 100% false, manmade, Godless, abominations. They are the manmade religions of the accursed of God. Repent, and learn what the truth, the gospel, and the Christianity of the Bible actually is.
The Catholics in the Philippines especially on Wednesday Mass on the Mother Perpetual Help devotion, devotees would kneel walk from the front entrance of the church to the altar. And during lent, Catholics in the Philippines recites the Passion, it's a singing of bible-based narrative of Christ life, passion and death, Catholics also fast a lot.
How does that work? I mean if the RC church thinks that RCs can go to the Orthodox church and receive the Eucharist, but from the Orthodox perspective, they cannot. That is a bit like one bank saying you can get a loan or a line of credit from another bank, whereas the other bank does not have the same policy, so in the end you do not get the loan from the other bank.
I think that even in extreme situations such as a gulag camp, there still was no inter-communion. The RC priest said his mass in his corner and the Orthodox priest had the Divine Liturgy when he could. Does anyone have some specific information on this subject? I have heard that they respected one another in the camps, but did not pray together. Communal prayer was a dangerous thing there in any case. Even Orthodox had to hid that they were praying together for fear of being punished by the camp guards. I am sure that it was the same for the RCs.
@@stephanottawa7890 ,...None of this matters. The only thing that matters is both orthodoxy and catholicism are 100% manmade abominations. They are the religions of the accursed of God. No one who belongs to Jesus has anything to do with these Godless cults.
Very detailed, good series overall. Only real point of correction/expansion I would note is on calendars. 1. Contrary to popular belief, the Revised Julian is actually not the mix of Gregorian menaion (fixed days) with a Julian Paschalion (date of Pascha/easter). It actually refers to an alternative calendar for calculating the Menaion that happens to coincide with the Gregorian for the next 700 or so years. But it was made by a Serbian astronomer designed to be even more accurate than the Gregorian. 2. The use of the Julian Paschalion is simply a compromise made to celebrate Pascha at the same day as most Orthodox (more on that in the next point). The original intention was to use astronomical observation to determine Pascha rather than fixed tables, again beating the Gregorian in accuracy. 3. There are a handful of Orthodox Churches that utilize the Gregorian calendar. Most famous of these is the Finnish Orthodox Church, but there some parishes scattered in Europe that do the same.
I believe that re-unification of the east and west Churches is inevitable. I don't think the Holy Spirit will allow the schism to persist indefinitely. God bless brother.
Catholics can correct me if I am wrong. Another area of difference rarely discussed is in the area of soteriology. Catholics place a greater emphasis on works, while the Orthodox place great emphasis on controlling our passions.
@@beausu5823 I am curious to what degree the Catholics teach that controlling our passions is important for our salvation My understanding is that Catholics believe in faith and works while the Orthodox believe in faith plus controlling our passions.
@@stevepa999 I may be wrong, but there is a thing called “Latin guilt”where Catholics are very focused on controlling your sinful self because every time you sin you are “driving the nail into Jesus and making Mary cry”
I'm not familiar enough with Orthodoxy to make a comparison, but I do feel comfortable saying that perfection includes both of these things and it's a mistake to try and isolate them
@@tippiergnome8471That's a story told to children to make them think about how their actions effect others. Think about it. Catholics believe that St Mary was bodily assumed into heaven. Now if there are no tears in heaven, why would St Mary be crying there?
Enters 💓 : " ... Nothing could bring Us closer to Truth than Our gratitude to 💓 ... And ... Still ... Nothing could bring Us closer to 💓 than the most vicious ingratitude towards ... Us ... " 💓💓💓 Ya 💓💓💓
We in the Coptic Church pray in Agbyya seven times a day 🙂🙂 But we don’t pray with the Rosary Massacre. I originally thought it was an Islamic tradition because most Muslims pray with the Massacre. This is the first time I know that it is a Christian tradition 🙂🙂🙂
I've been involved in both sides and having read more about Christian history, it's very very different than the early Church. The Orthodox is just a more developed form of the early Church. Catholicism has so many differences in practice and beliefs from the early Church while the Orthodox is the same, even keeping the tradition of saying to lock the doors during the divine liturgy (when the early Church was persecuted and had to hide)
I really enjoyed this series. Here are a couple tips. Catholic Answers and such groups have absolutely no say whatsoever on what Holy Mother Church teaches. They are only interpreters, and they get a lot of important things wrong. You can reliably refer to the unified teaching of the popes & bishops as well as those considered doctors of the Church. Just a pronunciation note, everyone I know says imprimAHtur.
Yeah; some of the stuff he’s said about Orthodoxy is similar. Like it’s a flavor that exists in Orthodoxy, but a Church website doesn’t speak on behalf of the entirety of the Orthodox Church. In general this is all pretty good though. Especially for someone that is neither orthodox, nor Catholic, and is attempting to explain the two based on stuff they read from websites.
May I make a correction? The Orthodox Church in Finland is forced by Finnish law to celebrate Pascha - Easter with the Lutheran majority population. Possibly a Finn might add why and how this happened.
It is true that the Orthodox Church of Finland celebrates Easter on the same day as the Gregorian calendar. But it is not true that this is a requirement by secular law. The church’s highest govwrning body may make a decision to change the calendar. In fact, at its meeting last fall, a formal suggestion of the matter was discussed and decided on. The leader of Finland’s male monastery Valamo, Father Michael, had proposed this. It was rejected by a large majority.
In Finland Good Friday and Easter Monday (by the Gregorian calendar) are public holidays. Orthodox Christians are quite a minority in Finland (around 1% of population), even when we are a national church. I didn't follow the discussions around the possible calendar swap, but the days off might have been a factor
It isn't just "some" Orthodox who explain hesychasm via the Essence Energy distinction, hesychasm and the Essence Energy distinction were both defined together by Saint Palamas and made dogmatic for Eastern Orthodoxy. There is no separating the two. These videos do not explain the distinction well enough when it is such a fundamental difference between the two faiths.
The majority of these differences is actually just some different tradition from Latin and Greek or Russian churches, none of these looks like really incompatible or opposite thoughts
4 - 11 - 24 BIBLICAL GOSPEL 1st Corinthians 15 : 1 - 4 ( EUANGELION ) in the GREEK for the GRACE of the Good News of the Gospel of Jesus Christ ( The CROSS ✝️ ) His BURIAL ( NOT RESTED ) His PHYSICAL RESURRECTION on a beautiful SUNDAY !
Glad I’m neither so I don’t have to deal with all this pettiness (how to hold my fingers. Start on the left or right to make a cross, weekly dictated fasts, etc.)
The understanding of contraceptives for Orthodox is far from what I've ever heard. It is usually condemned as you mentioned about the antiochian church in Pennsylvania. We are relatively close in understanding with the catholics with economia for health and natural family planning. Other than that it is not something that is willy nilly. Never encouraged nor taught In seminary. Something to revisit
Why are the Greek records for the Patriarchs of Jerusalem perfectly in tact except for when the martyr St Albert of Jerusalem was Patriarch there? The Armenian Patriarch of Jerusalem departed only a year or so after Albert's enthronement and they didn't appoint a replacement because they already respected him for having negotiated a treaty which ended a war for them.
I probably would have watched an hour or two ago, if I had been more careful. I kept scrolling past, mistaking it flr a Star Wars video because of the right half of the thumbnail.
I like how the Orthodox say the Catholic Church left, when at the moment the Great Schism began, it was a mutual excommunication of the Patriarch of Constantinople and the Pope of Rome
What I miss in this list is Theosis. That is an orthodox theological concept that has no real counterpart in catholicism (but it does have one in Lutheran theology). It is quite a big deal to many orthodox so I was confused by its absence here. Another point is the meaning to Jesus' death. I heard that orthodox so not have a y explicit teaching that describes how exactly the death of Jesus saves man. Unlike catholics or protestants, they do not fixate upon a single specific way of explaining it like saying that Jesus had to die to satisfy God's wrath or that Jesus was a substitute or That Jesus was a kind of ransom to buy us free. Orthodox simply believe it is a mystery how exactly his death saves us. At least that is what I was told.
Inquirer here and I might entirely be wrong, however it was explained to me from somewhere (I don't have the source) but Jesus's death was actually to save us from alienation from God.
12:07 You'd think God would have clarified that during prayer on the subject. 13:16 "Not including fish", because eating oysters, lobster, fried catfish, tuna, blackened redfish, etc, etc is absolutely penitent!!
@@Saint_nobody "He" didn't clarify it back when Orthodox priests were praying about it back when the Pill first became available. Unless the priests didn't actually pray about it.
@@RonJohn63God won’t reveal biological realities by prayer.. Some things are only discovered by using microscopes, like chromosomes, in old times people thought sperm we’re literal little humans so that is why they likened contraception to murder, but now we know sperm are simply body cells
@@RonJohn63 Contraceptives have existed forever. The Didache already banned them. As for NFP, it is against the Canons of St. Basil for a man to engage in Marital Relations with his wife only when she is not fertile.
Actually, depending on which Eastern Catholic churches and which Orthodox churches you're speaking about, are not similar but absolutely identical. That's because they're the same exact churches, except one part is in communion with the Roman church and the other part is not. In practical terms, all the label Orthodox means is that the church is not in communion with Rome. However, every Orthodox church as Catholic counterpart as every Orthodox church has, itself, split since the great schism, with some part returning to communion with Rome.
In a way he did; Peter founded the Church in Rome, tradionally Andrew founded the church in what would be Constantinople, James presided over the church in Jerusalem, Barnabas founded the church in Antioch, Mark founded the Coptic Church in Alexandria and so on…
The only thing you need to understand is what the truth of the Bible is. And, the truth of the Bible is, both orthodoxy and catholicism are 100% false manmade Godless religions. That is all you need to know about them.
@@forthosewithearstohear6219 That’s a baseless assertion. You are free to disagree with both Catholicism and Eastern Orthodoxy and their claims to being the one true Church, but you actually have to prove how these particular Churches aren’t biblical. Not only that, but you then have to prove how *your* church is biblical.
@@CybermanKing ,...No, I do not have to do any of those things. This has nothing to do with what I agree or disagree with, but only with what the truth of the Bible is that all actual Christians understand. Also, the spiritually alive can prove nothing to the spiritually dead. No amount of Biblical truth shown to you will mean nor change a thing. Those snared int the Godless abominations of orthodoxy/catholicism are the accursed of God. You all possess zero ability to understand Biblical truth. And this is why you all are where you all are. Get away from the church that is 100% apostate, repent, cry out to God for mercy, and learn what the truth, the gospel, and the Christianity of the Bible actually is.
3rd episode. The schism is acted. The Roman Church is now a Pontifical State. The Roman Pontiffs hold "the two swords" (political and spiritual powers). They claim that only Rome is universal (catholic). But there is a little detail still : The Church still recognizes the 8thbecumenical council, hold in Constantinople in 879 and accepted by saint pope John VIII. And the 8th ecumenical council anathematized anyone who dare to add or subtract anything to or from the Nicene Creed. So technically The Roman Church self anathematized herself by adding the filioque to the Creed before provoking the schism. In 1204 the 4th crusade sacs Constantinople as installs a Latin byzantine emperor who tries to create a Latin eastern Church. It's a failure though. The filioque dispute is still very present and the Greeks never lack an opportunity to tell the Latins they self-anathematized themselves. The eastern Romans (I will call them Greeks from now on) reconquer their capital 65 years later and kick the Latins out (quite violently to say the least). In Rome a solution is found to the Greeks' argument : If John VIII was not a valid pope, his acts are null and void and therefore the 8th ecumenical council is not valid either. No self-anesthetization. Rome is clean... So John VIII is removed from the list of the popes. Why? Here is the entry for John VIII in the official biography of the popes written by the prefect of the Vatical Library 1479 : "Pope John VIII: John, of English extraction, was born at Mentz (Mainz) and is said to have arrived at popedom by evil art; for disguising herself like a man, whereas she was a woman, she went when young with her paramour, a learned man, to Athens, and made such progress in learning under the professors there that, coming to Rome, she met with few that could equal, much less go beyond her, even in the knowledge of the scriptures; and by her learned and ingenious readings and disputations, she acquired so great respect and authority that upon the death of Pope Leo IV (as Martin says) by common consent she was chosen pope in his room. As she was going to the Lateran Church between the Colossean Theatre (so called from Nero's Colossus) and St. Clement's her travail came upon her, and she died upon the place, having sat two years, one month, and four days, and was buried there without any pomp." From the 14th to the 16th century one can admire a bust of "pope Joan" in the collection of pontifical busts of the Cathedral of Siena (Italy) with the legend : "Johannes VIII, Femina ex Anglia" (Joan VIII, female from England) But the legend of the pope Joan is debunked and weaponized by the protestants forcing pope Clement to admit it's untrue in 1601. John VIII is restored among the popes, but for some reason Rome forgot to restore the validity of his acts, and still does not recognize the 8th ecumenical council of 878 as valid. Also, they forgot to canonize him despite the fact that he died as a martyr during his pontificate. The Protestants were gone and no one was challenging the papacy on those points. The Greeks were under the ottoman rule. Rome is having the last word at least.. wait? what? The Greek liberated themselves from the Turks in 1830? Not again! Here they come with their orthodoxy and endless debates about the filioque... What can Rome do about that? What if the popes were infallible ? No more debate with the Greeks! The pope speaks and basta! So now we have an inflation of new Roman doctrines in the XIXth century. Until Vatican II. But that's yet another episode.
Last episode : Vatican II. Now the Roman Church has no Pontifical State anymore and needs to rebuild her universality on other grounds than the imperial power to crown kings. The new concept is ecumenism : Instead of setting the heretics on fire, Rome will expose them to endless hugs and co-celebrations till they die or convert (that's humor). The interesting event happens in 1995, when John-Paul II receives the Patriarch of Constantinople in Rome. He demands the publication of the following clarification concerning the filioque : "The Catholic Church acknowledges the conciliar, ecumenical, normative and irrevocable value, as expression of the one common faith of the Church and of all Christians, of the Symbol professed in Greek at Constantinople in 381 by the Second Ecumenical Council. No profession of faith peculiar to a particular liturgical tradition can contradict this expression of the faith taught and professed by the undivided Church." Pontificial Council for Promoting Christian Unity - L'Osservatore Romano - 20 September 1995, So almost 1000 years later, Rome admits that the Orthodox Church is the one professing the universal (catholic) creed and that the filioque is peculiar to a particular liturgical tradition and therefore not universal (catholic). Since then the filioque has been progressively dropped from the recitation of the creed in the Roman Catholic Church. But does that make them orthodox? No of course. The other main problem was the supreme juridiction of the Roman pontiffs over the Church although the Tiara has been dropped as well. End of the story. For now. Lord have mercy upon me the talkative sinner. ☦
I really appreciate this series, from which I have learned much. Though actually a lapsed Roman Catholic who still respects the tradition and see value in it, I too tend to see Orthodox churches as being the closest ones to the version of catholicism I'm most familiar with and, indeed, to see them as sharing the same direct descent from the universalist (aka "catholic") orthodoxy of the early Church fathers. I certainly have never begrudged the Orthodox the characteristic features of their tradition. (In many respects, I tend to favour Orthodox practices in relation to, say, the marriage of priests and the look and feel of their churches and services.) That said, both still face obvious challenges in adapting to the modern world, particularly as relates to the role of women in positions of authority...
It's fascinating how the Orthodox Church is not orthodox on the issues of contraception and divorce while the Catholic Church is orthodox on those issues.
Contraception is banned in the Orthodox Church, including NFP which is allowed by the Roman See. As for the Marriage issue, an annulment is a divorce in everything but name. The Children don't become bastards, since their parents were never married, there is a split of means and goods and both parties can petition to remarry. In Orthodoxy divorce is a sin and second marriages are very rarely allowed, let alone thirds. This is all laid forth in St. Basil's Canons, which is accepted by both East and West.
There is no Orthodox Church, only 17 autocephalous Orthodox churches. Everyone of which has split up with some part returning to communion with Rome. This is why the Catholic Church is made up of 24 sui iuris churches, only one of which is the Roman "Catholic" church.
In practice though, the Orthodox church is considerably more orthodox given that the divorce rate among Orthodox is way lower than the divorce rate among Catholics. And while I won’t get into the nitty gritty of it, in Orthodox confession (since most Orthodox parishes are smaller than Catholic parishes in the West) is very… personal, and it’s very common for priests/spiritual fathers to advise literally each and every married parishioner on matters of contraception to make sure they are all in line with what the Church teaches is acceptable/unacceptable methods. My Catholic friends will say that their priests make general statements, but it doesn’t seem like there’s the deep personal and confessional connection in this particular matter between Catholic parishioners and their priests. Just my experience!!
@@St.MartinofToursPrayToGodForUs none, I'm full blown atheist but I have deep respect for orthodoxy, even though it's probably wrong biblically and the JWs got a lot of things right
@@cygnustsp not only is Orthodoxy biblical, but the Bible stems from and is part of Orthodox tradition. It was Orthodox bishops who compiled it in the first place.
Are you aware the Coptic Orthodox Church recently suspended dialogue with the Roman Catholic Church because Pope Francis publicly announced that sodomite blessings could be given? Please note: I'm not saying that's what Pope Francis' statement said. I'm saying that's what the Copts understood it to mean and that is why, according to their own announcement, they suspended dialogue.
@@Ggdivhjkjl As a Catholic, the Copts were right to suspend dialogue. Many Catholic dioceses around the world have outright refused to obey his directive. The entire Catholic church in Africa has refused to bless gay couples as well. Francis is not a good Pope. It's not only the Orthodox who think so, but the majority of Catholics as well.
What it is so mind-boggling that the sign of the Cross was done the orthodox way for the fist 1190 years even in Rome until 1190 AD then it was reversed. a Roman Deacon who later became Pope Innocent III witnessed that some people in Rome had started to make the sign of the Cross in the opposite direction so since then it has become the typical western way. Although we know that the Cross originated in Apostolic times.
The sign of the cross is only done by those who are outside of the kingdom of God. Please show me where the Bible tells us to make the sign of the cross? Anyone who makes the sign of the cross is showing themselves to be the accursed of God.
@@forthosewithearstohear6219 my dear friend Early christians used to trace a little cross on their foreheads. They associated the practice with references in Ezekiel 9:7 and Revelation 7:3, 9:4, and 14:1, all which describe believers bearing God's seal on their foreheads. Unfortunately you believe in sola scriptura and you need more Christian education than if is not in the bible.... Not everything we do is in the bible and again which of the 600 different mistranslated bibles you have. For example we believe in a Trinitarian God, however the word Trinity it doesn't appear in the bible. The sign of the cross was learned from the Apostles, and also administered in Baptisms. This is a problem for the protestants who protested against Rome but instead of returning to the original Church that Jesus built they went their own ways and know we have 45,000 different protestant denominations and growing weekly. The Church that Jesus Built put together the bible you are reading but since it was some time mistranslated from the Greek on purpose to fit your particular group's thinking there are bibles out there that are missing pages upon pages from the real bible. Regardless know days people are coming to the Church that Jesus built because we have vast access to information and are able to come to the Church that Jesus built. One Holy Catholic (not Roman) and Apostolic Church that for 2000 years has not changed.
@@kyriakosaronis4872 @kyriakosaronis4872 ,...Yes, everything fake christians do is not in the Bible, it is all unbiblical manmade nonsense. The trinity is a perfect example of the unbiblical, false, manmade nonsense you believe. There is no trinity! The trinity is a 100% false manmade CONcept as is everything you believe. You did not learn the sign of the cross from the apostles. You learned all the 100% unbiblical nonsense you believe in, hold to, and practice, from your ungodly, blind, lost, and deceived fathers. Anyone who in not in protest against the catholics/orthodox/rome, the apostolic, and whatever else you all hold to, cannot possible be a Christian. Your church is a 100% Godless, manmade fraud. Where does the Bible tall us to make a little cross across our foreheads, or to make and kind of sign of the cross? The fact is, it doesn't, and in reality, tells us to have nothing to do with all these false manmade acts of ignorance. You, and your whole fake manmade religion is a manmade, Godless, abomination. You are all the accursed of God and will all be cast into the lake of fire. However, you all being spiritually dead and blind, as well as completely Biblically illiterate will reject the truth I have given for your edification and will just go right back to your wallowing in the mire. You are all vessels of wrath and brute beasts made only to be destroyed just as your Godless fathers were. Repent!
@@triggered8556 ,...I do not assume anything. I know with 100% certainty that the Bible and its 66 books are the only thing God has spoken/given to the world. There is no other source of truth other than the 66 books of the Bible. If anyone looks outside of these 66 books, they will only be deceived, and this is exactly why everything known as the church is all 100% apostate. Every man of God has one book in their library, the Bible. Again, if anyone looks to anything else, they are not a Christian, they are just another totally blind, lost, and deceived fake christian and a vessel of Gods wrath made only to be destroyed.
The idea to treat these churches in the same way you would denominations has really undermined the whole project. There is no Orthodox Church, only 17 autocephalous Orthodox churches, every one of which has split up with some part returning to communion with the Roman church. Hence we can speak of a Catholic Church made up 24 sui iuris churches, only one of which is the Roman "Catholic" church, and so every difference you mention, all arbitrary and some mistaken, is really a difference that exists within the Universal, i.e. Catholic, Church.
Nevertheless, the fact is everything called orthodox and catholic is all 100% apostate from God and are nothing but false manmade Godless religions. They are the religions of the accursed of God.
Considering he denied the virgin birth and was never in communion with Catholics or Orthodox he would never be considered for canonization. That being said I believe the ELCA and episcopal church consider him a saint and celebrate him on January 15th
I'm not sure... probably, yes. I'm Eastern Orthodox and as far as I know we think of anyone who made it to heaven as a saint. Some are known, others are unknown. We also don't think that only Eastern Orthodox people can go to heaven and that at the end of the day, it's God's decision. So regarding MLK, his public career was positive, but I'm not sure about his private life. I've heard less flattering things about his private life, like him cheating. So... overall, eh, why not? I've seen more flawed individuals be recognized as saints.
Why he even should be? He was neither Catholic nor Orthodox. In terms of black American Catholic saints then there is venerable Augustus Tolton, who is in process to become a saint (he already completed step 1 and 2 mentioned in this video)
Wonder why the Orthodox haven't updated their canons since before the Great Schism....despite the Orthodox always claiming to be the apex of all tradition, Catholics are more traditional in the sense that they have carried on the living, breathing spirit of the first millennium Church by continuing to add canons. The Orthodox in this regard seem...dead (no offense, I love Orthodoxy!). Why?
we consider the development of doctrine by the Pope to be one of Rome's heresies. we continue the faith of the Church fathers and valid ecumenical councils.
Except we have? The Anathema against Protestantism in 1672, the Anathema against the Ecumenists in the 1800s. The Orthodox Church doesn't act in reaction to Rome.
@@BaikalTii I'm aware! That is common knowledge. Do you know why the Orthodox added new universal canons for the first thousand years but haven't added any since the 10th century?
@@SamDiMento ,...You are all completely steeped in darkness, deception, and in a 100% antichrist christianity. You are all snared into everything the Bible warned you not to be deceived by, Repent, all of you!
The Orthodox church does not approve of any contraception that kills a fertilized egg. We are just more tolerant of things like condoms that prevent fertilization.
@@kevinlionel572 the condom is non-abortiform, the spponge, the diafragm. All the pills are abortiform in contrast and "modern" i.e. satanic women all prefer the pill. While with the others you may make a case of their use even for the christians for the pill there is no case to make
That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit. Water baptism won’t do a thing to save you. According to the Bible, a sinner is born again /born of the Spirit the moment he trusts Jesus Christ as his own personal Saviour. If you’re still trusting in your baptism or your church or your works, then you’ve never trusted Jesus Christ. Jesus is exclusive. “That we should be to the praise of his glory, who first trusted in Christ. In whom ye also trusted, after that ye heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation: in whom also after that ye believed, ye were sealed with that holy Spirit of promise” - Ephesians 1:12-13 KJV
@@RealBobEvans Christ commands us to baptize, and we are told that baptism saves. We don't know everything that baptism does, certainly we know some of the works that God does through baptism. But others are a mystery. He commands us to be baptized, and that it saves, how it saves is somewhat of a mystery. But, it is safe to trust Jesus Christ for our salvation. May the Lord Jesus Christ have mercy on me, a sinner.
Salvation is by faith alone in the Lord Jesus Christ alone! He said “it is finished”! Believe on him as your personal Saviour and be saved today! You cannot add works, otherwise you’re just trusting in yourself like every other religion. Trust Jesus Christ alone! You must receive the free gift of salvation that Jesus offers. “For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast.” - Ephesians 2:8-9 KJV “Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus” - Romans 3:24 KJV “But these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through his name.” - John 20:31 KJV
@@tclearytcleary James 2 does not teach that faith plus works save, otherwise it would be contradicting John 3:16, Ephesians 2:8-9, Romans 5:1, Galatians 2:16 and numerous other verses that state we're saved by faith apart from works. God looks inward and sees a man’s heart. We are justified in God’s eyes by faith alone. “Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law.” - Romans 3:28 KJV Man looks at the outward appearance. So if someone is preaching about faith, but they have no works to back it up, they look like fools. That is why James 2 says we need works so that we can be a faithful witness of Jesus Christ to people. The works do not save us though. Works play no part in salvation. The faith in Jesus Christ is what saves. The Holy Bible says that we are saved the moment that we truly trust Jesus Christ as our Saviour. “In whom we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins, according to the riches of his grace… That we should be to the praise of his glory, who first trusted in Christ. In whom ye also trusted, after that ye heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation: in whom also after that ye believed, ye were sealed with that holy Spirit of promise” - Ephesians 1:7,12-13 KJV “Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life.” - John 5:24 KJV After we are already saved, then God will start to work in us and work good works through us. But those works do not cause salvation. “For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast. For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them.” - Ephesians 2:8-10 KJV
@@JudeMalachi What was finished? - God's redemption of mankind. Jesus paid for all of the world's sins by shedding his blood on the cross. He purchased us with his own blood. "And you, being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh, hath he quickened together with him, having forgiven you all trespasses; Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross" - Colossians 2:13-14 KJV "...to feed the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood." - Acts 20:28 KJV What demarcated it? - His death on the cross. Jesus lived the perfect sinless life that we could not. He died for the sins of the world on the cross. And immediately afterward the veil of the temple was ripped in half to show that we no longer go through priests or OT sacrifices to get to God. Now we get to God directly through Jesus Christ and his righteousness. "And, having made peace through the blood of his cross, by him to reconcile all things unto himself; by him, I say, whether they be things in earth, or things in heaven. And you, that were sometime alienated and enemies in your mind by wicked works, yet now hath he reconciled In the body of his flesh through death, to present you holy and unblameable and unreproveable in his sight" - Colossians 1:20-22 KJV "For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus" - 1 Timothy 2:5 KJV "And every priest standeth daily ministering and offering oftentimes the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins: But this man, after he had offered one sacrifice for sins for ever, sat down on the right hand of God" - Hebrews 10:11-12 KJV What should be your response to this? - Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and thou shalt be saved. Don't add your religion/church/traditions. Don't add your own good works or supposed righteousness. Trust Jesus Christ and him alone as your personal Saviour. When you believe on Jesus Christ, God will impute the righteousness of Christ to your account. You will enter heaven based on Christ's perfect righteousness, and his alone. Trying to add your own righteousness to Christ's finished work will only result in you falling way short. God bless! "For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast." - Ephesians 2:8-9 KJV "In whom we have redemption through his blood, even the forgiveness of sins" - Colossians 1:14 KJV "And brought them out, and said, Sirs, what must I do to be saved? And they said, Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved, and thy house." - Acts 16:30-31 KJV "For he hath made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him." - 2 Corinthians 5:21 KJV "For they being ignorant of God's righteousness, and going about to establish their own righteousness, have not submitted themselves unto the righteousness of God. For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to every one that believeth." - Romans 10:3-4 KJV
Catholics: It's not such a big deal
Orthodox: Yes, it is
I hope that you do not mean this in regard to your eternal salvation....It is a big deal!
Depends on who you ask with the Catholics and Orthodox, most indigenous Orthodox layman see no reason why the two churches can't be united and its similar to Catholicism, the traditionalists of both movements (the ones who actually represent the historical positions of these churches) would take issue with compromise for the sake of unity.
@@drjanitor3747 agreed
For the internet Orthodox. Orthodox irl are much more chill towards Cathoics from my experiences. Most of the internet Orthodox online were American Protestants that converted to Orthodoxy and keep their anti Catholic zeal. Some really traditional Catholics are rabidly anti Orthodox also.
@@Cal20000As a Trad Latin Mass Catholic, I believe the Eastern Orthodox are brothers in Christ that separated and prots are ilillegitimate bastard half-breeds created from rapists 500 years ago.
Thank you-again-for all the hard work that went into this series. I've saved it to share with Catholic friends who insist that the Orthodox are "basically the same as us".
It's a false dichotomy which really undermines the value of these videos, as there is no Orthodox church that doesn't have a counterpart in the Catholic Church. The Roman church may indeed be different than any of one of the 17 autocephalous Orthodox churches, but no more than they of the other 24 sui iuris Catholic churches spread across five other liturgical rites. These differences already exist within Catholicism and don't pose a problem.
As an Orthodox Christian, I’ve enjoyed this series and I appreciate the fact that you make it clear that we have some very big and important differences with RCs.
Most Orthodox use prayer ropes, not beads.
Ropes > Beads
Buuuuut, Rosary prayers > Jesus Prayer.
Technically beads are acceptable to use according to the Saints. But the Knots used to make Prayer Ropes are part of the Larger Tradition.
@@acekoala457 Didn’t say we can’t use them, just that they’re less common.
It's a false dichotomy which really undermines the value of these videos, as there is no Orthodox church that doesn't have a counterpart in the Catholic Church. The Roman church may indeed be different than any of one of the 17 autocephalous Orthodox churches, but no more than they of the other 24 sui iuris Catholic churches spread across five other liturgical rites. These differences already exist within Catholicism and don't pose a problem.
@@JudeMalachi It’s hardly a false dichotomy. There are real, important dogmatic differences between Rome and Orthodoxy.
The Jesus Prayer is beautiful (Protestant here).
This has been a great series. Thank you for doing it.
Completely disagree, the whole project was sunk by the flawed premise, as there is no "Orthodox Church" only Orthodox churches. In fact, there are 17 of them and they vary to some degree from one another. However, all these churches have a Catholic counterpart. This series is really more like the different between the Roman (Catholic) Church and other sui iuris churches that are also Catholic. Consequently, there is no Orthodox/Catholic dichotomy, only the spectrum of belief that exists with the Catholic church, some of which is shared with to varying extent with any of the autocephalous Orthodox churches.
@@JudeMalachi
Is Gregory Palamas a saint?
Not all Catholics say the rosary or attend Stations. They're not obligated. And the Orthodox had a rosary that used the angelic salutation (1st half of the Hail Mary) dating back to the 8th Century. It obviously caught on more in the West, where it continues to be practiced today, than the East.
The first step in Catholic canonization is to be named a "Servant of God," which is a recognition of "heroic virtue" in the deceased faithful. The main difference between the Servants of God and the Venerable is a more rigorous level of review. Some Servants of God are Nicholas Black Elk, Dorothy Day, and Fr. Vincent Capodanno.
Well Servant of God is a title for someone being considered for canonization, idk if you would consider it a phase though
@@aidensadvice7816 I would. It functionally indicates interest in canonizing the person.
Servant of God is a title given to someone who is elected to be canonized for sainthood.
Great series! I thank God I was born in a time I could choose from an unbiased position which apostolic church to join, and that I am blessed to have more than one within driving distance.
St Seraphim of Sarov prayed the rosary and said it was an ancient Orthodox practice which had been lost.
And an Irish monastic practice from the 8th century
Western rite Orthodox also pray the rosary. Nothing wrong with the rosary. It is very beautiful. St. John of Shanghai and San Francisco probably would also have agreed. As he helped to re-establish/re-awaken the western rite.
Based
Although the Rosary is associated with Catholics, it is believed by some Orthodox to be originally an Orthodox form of prayer that fell out of common practice in the East, but was adopted by the West. Some trace it to the eighth century. One form of it comes from St. Seraphim of Sarov. There are 15 meditations, each accompanied by 10 Hail Mary's (Eastern version), followed by the Lord's Prayer and the Jesus Prayer.
@@baoxidiaoyu That would make it Orthodox.
As a Catholic, I pray the Rosary during the day as it takes some concentration on the mysteries. At night, when falling asleep, I'll pray the Orthodox Jesus prayer.
Christ is risen! ☦️🙏♥️
Not yet, my Catholic friend. 😉
@@curiousing for Catholics , we use the Gregorian calendar so Easter had passed.
I'm so confused... a Catholic using an Orthodox cross, saying Christ is risen, when He hasn't yet (at least from the Eastern perspective, even for Uniates)... What is going on...?
@@St.MartinofToursPrayToGodForUs it's not an orthodox cross, it's an eastern cross and I attend a Byzantine Ruthenian Catholic Church.
It is an eastern Catholic church in communion with Rome and follows the Gregorian calendar.
Christ is risen!☦️🙏♥️
Christ is Risen, whether it was last week or yet to come when one venerates this blessed occasion matters less than the fact it happened and we are saved thereby. God be praised.
Excellent video, yet again.
Truly excellent series.
In our canon law which is a bit more universal than implied here, we are told not to prostrate on Sundays as it’s the day of Christ Holy Resurrection, however the Greek church has begun to do this in imitation of the Roman Catholics, they kneel, they don’t prostrate fully but it holds the same meaning
I've been waiting for this! RUclips finally lets me know 😅
Wow! Thanks for that series.
What a great way to end the day with!
The Oriental Orthodox make the sign of the cross in the same direction as the West.
Agreed
Shhhh... the EO must keep their delusion that their customs should be universal and anything deviating from them is outright heresy
@@igorlopes7589
You changed the way you cross yourselves and now it matches the monophysite style. Thumbs up, I guess! 👍
People having been make pilgrimages to the Holy Land since the time of the apostles, however the RC stations of the cross devotion emerged in the late middle ages as a sort of substitute for those who could not afford a pilgrimage to the Holy Land or when the Holy Land was not attainable due to Islamic colonization or occupation of Jerusalem (they still occupy the temple mount). The stations spread from Italy under the influence of the Franciscan friars and was thought for many years as a Franciscan church practice. Hence there were no stations of the cross in non-Franciscan parishes for a time, until due to a general popularization, the practice spread. It was also unknown in Northern Europe until after the Reformation. That is the reason why there are no stations in the medieval cathedrals of the Lutheran lands. There the images were not destroyed to a great extent as they were in Calvinistic countries, but there are no stations to be found as there were not any in the first place. They were added to RC churches that did not become Protestant in the Counter Reformation period. The claim that they were known for a millennium is therefore ridiculous, if not purposely misleading.
Thank you this has been helpful.
WE MADE IT TO THE END WOOHOO
God be praised!
You touched on the Rosary but not on the Catholic devotion of chaplets i.e. Chaplet of the Divine Mercy etc., some of which are very popular. Another distinction you didn't include is that of wearing scapulars, such as the Brown Scapular and others. The way Marian apparitions have informed popular Catholic devotion versus the Orthodox who (basically) don't believe in Marian apparitions, though if you start to lift the veil there are a few locally accepted ones. But in the Catholic sphere, Fatima alone is so defining of Catholicism, yet only happened 100 years ago. Add Lourdes, Akita, and many more...and that's sort of what I love about the Catholic tradition. Despite the mystery and beauty of Orthodox worship, the Catholic Church is ever-changing, ever-new, yet still firmly rooted to Tradition (although of course the Orthodox would disagree...but that's how I see it). Responding to and engaging with the world in which is finds itself while still remaining Church.
Firmly rooted by traditions, with dj priests, NO looking like high church protestant services and such lmao.
@@k-v-d1795 Lol calm down! Why so nasty.
The fact is, both orthodoxy and catholicism are 100% false, manmade, Godless, abominations. They are the manmade religions of the accursed of God. Repent, and learn what the truth, the gospel, and the Christianity of the Bible actually is.
The Catholics in the Philippines especially on Wednesday Mass on the Mother Perpetual Help devotion, devotees would kneel walk from the front entrance of the church to the altar. And during lent, Catholics in the Philippines recites the Passion, it's a singing of bible-based narrative of Christ life, passion and death, Catholics also fast a lot.
How is it you know so much about this ungodly cult?
How does that work? I mean if the RC church thinks that RCs can go to the Orthodox church and receive the Eucharist, but from the Orthodox perspective, they cannot. That is a bit like one bank saying you can get a loan or a line of credit from another bank, whereas the other bank does not have the same policy, so in the end you do not get the loan from the other bank.
I think that even in extreme situations such as a gulag camp, there still was no inter-communion. The RC priest said his mass in his corner and the Orthodox priest had the Divine Liturgy when he could. Does anyone have some specific information on this subject? I have heard that they respected one another in the camps, but did not pray together. Communal prayer was a dangerous thing there in any case. Even Orthodox had to hid that they were praying together for fear of being punished by the camp guards. I am sure that it was the same for the RCs.
@@stephanottawa7890 ,...None of this matters. The only thing that matters is both orthodoxy and catholicism are 100% manmade abominations. They are the religions of the accursed of God. No one who belongs to Jesus has anything to do with these Godless cults.
Very detailed, good series overall. Only real point of correction/expansion I would note is on calendars.
1. Contrary to popular belief, the Revised Julian is actually not the mix of Gregorian menaion (fixed days) with a Julian Paschalion (date of Pascha/easter). It actually refers to an alternative calendar for calculating the Menaion that happens to coincide with the Gregorian for the next 700 or so years. But it was made by a Serbian astronomer designed to be even more accurate than the Gregorian.
2. The use of the Julian Paschalion is simply a compromise made to celebrate Pascha at the same day as most Orthodox (more on that in the next point). The original intention was to use astronomical observation to determine Pascha rather than fixed tables, again beating the Gregorian in accuracy.
3. There are a handful of Orthodox Churches that utilize the Gregorian calendar. Most famous of these is the Finnish Orthodox Church, but there some parishes scattered in Europe that do the same.
You seem to know much about Georgian way of thinking can you tell me more please 🙏🏻
The Rudder isn't exactly a code, but it's definitely equivalent to the Codex Juris Canonici.
I’m Orthodox and love my Catholic brothers. If y’all wanna talk about unification, let’s start with getting Constantinople and Hagia Sophia back
I believe that re-unification of the east and west Churches is inevitable. I don't think the Holy Spirit will allow the schism to persist indefinitely.
God bless brother.
So how? Because i think the Turkish people living there wont like that. Ethnic purge of Istanbul?
The orthodox and the catholics are only brothers and sisters in the lake of fire where all of you are headed. You are all the accursed of God. Repent!
@@GR65330 ,...Repent!
How about starting with the heterodox beliefs of the Roman Church.
Catholics can correct me if I am wrong. Another area of difference rarely discussed is in the area of soteriology. Catholics place a greater emphasis on works, while the Orthodox place great emphasis on controlling our passions.
The Catholic Church is not focused on Works. The Catholic Church teaches faith and works.
@@beausu5823 I am curious to what degree the Catholics teach that controlling our passions is important for our salvation My understanding is that Catholics believe in faith and works while the Orthodox believe in faith plus controlling our passions.
@@stevepa999 I may be wrong, but there is a thing called “Latin guilt”where Catholics are very focused on controlling your sinful self because every time you sin you are “driving the nail into Jesus and making Mary cry”
I'm not familiar enough with Orthodoxy to make a comparison, but I do feel comfortable saying that perfection includes both of these things and it's a mistake to try and isolate them
@@tippiergnome8471That's a story told to children to make them think about how their actions effect others. Think about it. Catholics believe that St Mary was bodily assumed into heaven. Now if there are no tears in heaven, why would St Mary be crying there?
Enters 💓 : " ... Nothing could bring Us closer to Truth than Our gratitude to 💓 ... And ... Still ... Nothing could bring Us closer to 💓 than the most vicious ingratitude towards ... Us ... "
💓💓💓 Ya 💓💓💓
Actually the Orthodox prayer ropes use knots rather than beads.
I think this is Slavic vs Mediterranian difference
slavs have knots, mediterr have beads
@@theot2141 Not so. I have a prayer rope from Greece with knots separated by beads every 10 knots.
Both are used
Most Roman Catholic lay folk I know who observe Lent just abstain from meat on Friday during Lent.
We in the Coptic Church pray in Agbyya seven times a day 🙂🙂 But we don’t pray with the Rosary Massacre. I originally thought it was an Islamic tradition because most Muslims pray with the Massacre. This is the first time I know that it is a Christian tradition 🙂🙂🙂
I've been involved in both sides and having read more about Christian history, it's very very different than the early Church. The Orthodox is just a more developed form of the early Church. Catholicism has so many differences in practice and beliefs from the early Church while the Orthodox is the same, even keeping the tradition of saying to lock the doors during the divine liturgy (when the early Church was persecuted and had to hide)
Beyoncé, Zayn, Peter Gabriel, Rome, what do they all have in common?
Answer; they left the group for a solo career.
Does the Orthodox Church use a prayer rope made of beads woods/plastic, or only made of wool or silk?
I think all of the above. Most traditionally it’s wool, but I’ve seen multiple different ones.
I really enjoyed this series. Here are a couple tips.
Catholic Answers and such groups have absolutely no say whatsoever on what Holy Mother Church teaches. They are only interpreters, and they get a lot of important things wrong. You can reliably refer to the unified teaching of the popes & bishops as well as those considered doctors of the Church.
Just a pronunciation note, everyone I know says imprimAHtur.
He's trying to include popular understanding, which non-magisterial sources can provide.
Yeah; some of the stuff he’s said about Orthodoxy is similar. Like it’s a flavor that exists in Orthodoxy, but a Church website doesn’t speak on behalf of the entirety of the Orthodox Church. In general this is all pretty good though. Especially for someone that is neither orthodox, nor Catholic, and is attempting to explain the two based on stuff they read from websites.
Agreed websites are often unreliable sources of doctrine, though they do tend to represent the views of their designers well.
😊❤×w
May I make a correction? The Orthodox Church in Finland is forced by Finnish law to celebrate Pascha - Easter with the Lutheran majority population. Possibly a Finn might add why and how this happened.
What an absurd law. I wonder if they force other religions, such as Islam
How can the state tell the church how or when to celebrate their own feasts? Is Finland the heir of Roman Empire or something?
It is true that the Orthodox Church of Finland celebrates Easter on the same day as the Gregorian calendar. But it is not true that this is a requirement by secular law. The church’s highest govwrning body may make a decision to change the calendar. In fact, at its meeting last fall, a formal suggestion of the matter was discussed and decided on. The leader of Finland’s male monastery Valamo, Father Michael, had proposed this. It was rejected by a large majority.
I wonder if it's design to stop russians from acting in parallel to finnish society as an attempt to suppress the colonial legacy of russia in finland
In Finland Good Friday and Easter Monday (by the Gregorian calendar) are public holidays. Orthodox Christians are quite a minority in Finland (around 1% of population), even when we are a national church. I didn't follow the discussions around the possible calendar swap, but the days off might have been a factor
It isn't just "some" Orthodox who explain hesychasm via the Essence Energy distinction, hesychasm and the Essence Energy distinction were both defined together by Saint Palamas and made dogmatic for Eastern Orthodoxy. There is no separating the two. These videos do not explain the distinction well enough when it is such a fundamental difference between the two faiths.
The majority of these differences is actually just some different tradition from Latin and Greek or Russian churches, none of these looks like really incompatible or opposite thoughts
the theology of the filioque is ruinous to correct understanding of the Trinity.
Thank you for mentioning Western rite Orthodoxy!
I love how the Orthodox and the Catholics dispute who is the splitter.
Clearly it was the popular front. 🥸
@@Saint_nobody
People's front.
Why do you love it? That's messed up.
as Western Christians protestants are considered crypto-papists, which you might find amusing as well.
Both split from the Oriental Orthodox.
By the way, we in the Coptic Church sign the cross from left to right❤
Catholics: Orthodox are basically the same
RTH: here are 240 meaningful differences between....
Yes, they are both 100% false manmade religions ad are both 100% astray from God.
4 - 11 - 24
RCC : Mary the Mother of God
SDA : Ellen G White the Prophetess of God
4 - 11 - 24
BIBLICAL GOSPEL
1st Corinthians 15 : 1 - 4
( EUANGELION ) in the GREEK for the GRACE of the Good News of the Gospel of Jesus Christ
( The CROSS ✝️ )
His BURIAL ( NOT RESTED )
His PHYSICAL RESURRECTION on a beautiful SUNDAY !
Is that metropolitan saba
Glad I’m neither so I don’t have to deal with all this pettiness (how to hold my fingers. Start on the left or right to make a cross, weekly dictated fasts, etc.)
Shut up heretic
The understanding of contraceptives for Orthodox is far from what I've ever heard. It is usually condemned as you mentioned about the antiochian church in Pennsylvania. We are relatively close in understanding with the catholics with economia for health and natural family planning. Other than that it is not something that is willy nilly. Never encouraged nor taught In seminary. Something to revisit
Was the Holy Fire (Holy Light) mentioned as a difference? Only the Orthodox bishop receives It.
Why are the Greek records for the Patriarchs of Jerusalem perfectly in tact except for when the martyr St Albert of Jerusalem was Patriarch there? The Armenian Patriarch of Jerusalem departed only a year or so after Albert's enthronement and they didn't appoint a replacement because they already respected him for having negotiated a treaty which ended a war for them.
@@Ggdivhjkjl
Albert is a Schismatic, according to the Canons of St. Basil.
I probably would have watched an hour or two ago, if I had been more careful.
I kept scrolling past, mistaking it flr a Star Wars video because of the right half of the thumbnail.
Haha... Good one......... 😂😅😊🙂😐
They say and believe the same thing just said in different ways then fight about the other not saying something in the exact way the other says it.
so... which one is the one true church ?
None. But the Mormons, LatterDay Saints are closer than most will give them proper credit to.
@@Saint_nobody The mormons can barely even be classified as "Christian", let alone the true Church of Christ.
@@Saint_nobody Is this a joke?
@@Saint_nobodylmao
I like how the Orthodox say the Catholic Church left, when at the moment the Great Schism began, it was a mutual excommunication of the Patriarch of Constantinople and the Pope of Rome
@user-tx3ht2te1t Paul rebuked Peter in Antioch so Peter is not superior to any other Patriarch. Papal supremacy is a Roman invention.
@@georgesaguelton5751 Paul was upholding Peter's declaration.
@@jdotozPeter did not have any power or authority over the other apostles. Nowhere does he claim any special role, or power over the Church.
@@georgesaguelton5751 Jesus gave it to him.
@@jdotoz The Roman spin on Matthew 16:18 isn't accepted by the Orthodox Church.
What I miss in this list is Theosis. That is an orthodox theological concept that has no real counterpart in catholicism (but it does have one in Lutheran theology). It is quite a big deal to many orthodox so I was confused by its absence here.
Another point is the meaning to Jesus' death. I heard that orthodox so not have a y explicit teaching that describes how exactly the death of Jesus saves man. Unlike catholics or protestants, they do not fixate upon a single specific way of explaining it like saying that Jesus had to die to satisfy God's wrath or that Jesus was a substitute or That Jesus was a kind of ransom to buy us free. Orthodox simply believe it is a mystery how exactly his death saves us. At least that is what I was told.
Inquirer here and I might entirely be wrong, however it was explained to me from somewhere (I don't have the source) but Jesus's death was actually to save us from alienation from God.
Catholics have Deification. It's Augustinian.
12:07 You'd think God would have clarified that during prayer on the subject.
13:16 "Not including fish", because eating oysters, lobster, fried catfish, tuna, blackened redfish, etc, etc is absolutely penitent!!
He has.
Says who?
@@Saint_nobody "He" didn't clarify it back when Orthodox priests were praying about it back when the Pill first became available.
Unless the priests didn't actually pray about it.
@@RonJohn63God won’t reveal biological realities by prayer.. Some things are only discovered by using microscopes, like chromosomes, in old times people thought sperm we’re literal little humans so that is why they likened contraception to murder, but now we know sperm are simply body cells
@@RonJohn63
Contraceptives have existed forever. The Didache already banned them.
As for NFP, it is against the Canons of St. Basil for a man to engage in Marital Relations with his wife only when she is not fertile.
isn't tuna a fish?
Hi
Eastern Catholics have their own fasting and abstinence that are similar to the Orthodox, and their fast days.
Thank you for all you do!
Actually, depending on which Eastern Catholic churches and which Orthodox churches you're speaking about, are not similar but absolutely identical. That's because they're the same exact churches, except one part is in communion with the Roman church and the other part is not. In practical terms, all the label Orthodox means is that the church is not in communion with Rome. However, every Orthodox church as Catholic counterpart as every Orthodox church has, itself, split since the great schism, with some part returning to communion with Rome.
Love this series, but please learn how to pronounce ecclesiastical Latin.
last time I was this early, there was neither a Catholic nor an Orthodox church
Wow impressive, you were here before Christ’s death?
huh? you were alive before Christ?
@@ReactsRiot christ founded neither of these churches
@@edster_runs6194 christ didn't found those churches
In a way he did; Peter founded the Church in Rome, tradionally Andrew founded the church in what would be Constantinople, James presided over the church in Jerusalem, Barnabas founded the church in Antioch, Mark founded the Coptic Church in Alexandria and so on…
Only 3 comments?
😂 here’s hoping they’re better than this one…. That I myself sheepishly give.
❤☦️
can someone provide me an unbiased resource to understand the history and events the led and happened during the schism?
The only thing you need to understand is what the truth of the Bible is. And, the truth of the Bible is, both orthodoxy and catholicism are 100% false manmade Godless religions. That is all you need to know about them.
@@forthosewithearstohear6219 That’s a baseless assertion. You are free to disagree with both Catholicism and Eastern Orthodoxy and their claims to being the one true Church, but you actually have to prove how these particular Churches aren’t biblical. Not only that, but you then have to prove how *your* church is biblical.
@@CybermanKing ,...No, I do not have to do any of those things. This has nothing to do with what I agree or disagree with, but only with what the truth of the Bible is that all actual Christians understand.
Also, the spiritually alive can prove nothing to the spiritually dead. No amount of Biblical truth shown to you will mean nor change a thing. Those snared int the Godless abominations of orthodoxy/catholicism are the accursed of God. You all possess zero ability to understand Biblical truth. And this is why you all are where you all are.
Get away from the church that is 100% apostate, repent, cry out to God for mercy, and learn what the truth, the gospel, and the Christianity of the Bible actually is.
3rd episode. The schism is acted. The Roman Church is now a Pontifical State. The Roman Pontiffs hold "the two swords" (political and spiritual powers). They claim that only Rome is universal (catholic).
But there is a little detail still : The Church still recognizes the 8thbecumenical council, hold in Constantinople in 879 and accepted by saint pope John VIII.
And the 8th ecumenical council anathematized anyone who dare to add or subtract anything to or from the Nicene Creed.
So technically The Roman Church self anathematized herself by adding the filioque to the Creed before provoking the schism.
In 1204 the 4th crusade sacs Constantinople as installs a Latin byzantine emperor who tries to create a Latin eastern Church. It's a failure though. The filioque dispute is still very present and the Greeks never lack an opportunity to tell the Latins they self-anathematized themselves. The eastern Romans (I will call them Greeks from now on) reconquer their capital 65 years later and kick the Latins out (quite violently to say the least).
In Rome a solution is found to the Greeks' argument : If John VIII was not a valid pope, his acts are null and void and therefore the 8th ecumenical council is not valid either. No self-anesthetization. Rome is clean... So John VIII is removed from the list of the popes. Why? Here is the entry for John VIII in the official biography of the popes written by the prefect of the Vatical Library 1479 :
"Pope John VIII: John, of English extraction, was born at Mentz (Mainz) and is said to have arrived at popedom by evil art; for disguising herself like a man, whereas she was a woman, she went when young with her paramour, a learned man, to Athens, and made such progress in learning under the professors there that, coming to Rome, she met with few that could equal, much less go beyond her, even in the knowledge of the scriptures; and by her learned and ingenious readings and disputations, she acquired so great respect and authority that upon the death of Pope Leo IV (as Martin says) by common consent she was chosen pope in his room. As she was going to the Lateran Church between the Colossean Theatre (so called from Nero's Colossus) and St. Clement's her travail came upon her, and she died upon the place, having sat two years, one month, and four days, and was buried there without any pomp."
From the 14th to the 16th century one can admire a bust of "pope Joan" in the collection of pontifical busts of the Cathedral of Siena (Italy) with the legend :
"Johannes VIII, Femina ex Anglia" (Joan VIII, female from England)
But the legend of the pope Joan is debunked and weaponized by the protestants forcing pope Clement to admit it's untrue in 1601.
John VIII is restored among the popes, but for some reason Rome forgot to restore the validity of his acts, and still does not recognize the 8th ecumenical council of 878 as valid. Also, they forgot to canonize him despite the fact that he died as a martyr during his pontificate. The Protestants were gone and no one was challenging the papacy on those points. The Greeks were under the ottoman rule. Rome is having the last word at least.. wait? what? The Greek liberated themselves from the Turks in 1830? Not again! Here they come with their orthodoxy and endless debates about the filioque... What can Rome do about that? What if the popes were infallible ? No more debate with the Greeks! The pope speaks and basta! So now we have an inflation of new Roman doctrines in the XIXth century. Until Vatican II.
But that's yet another episode.
Last episode : Vatican II. Now the Roman Church has no Pontifical State anymore and needs to rebuild her universality on other grounds than the imperial power to crown kings. The new concept is ecumenism : Instead of setting the heretics on fire, Rome will expose them to endless hugs and co-celebrations till they die or convert (that's humor). The interesting event happens in 1995, when John-Paul II receives the Patriarch of Constantinople in Rome. He demands the publication of the following clarification concerning the filioque :
"The Catholic Church acknowledges the conciliar, ecumenical, normative and irrevocable value, as expression of the one common faith of the Church and of all Christians, of the Symbol professed in Greek at Constantinople in 381 by the Second Ecumenical Council. No profession of faith peculiar to a particular liturgical tradition can contradict this expression of the faith taught and professed by the undivided Church." Pontificial Council for Promoting Christian Unity - L'Osservatore Romano - 20 September 1995,
So almost 1000 years later, Rome admits that the Orthodox Church is the one professing the universal (catholic) creed and that the filioque is peculiar to a particular liturgical tradition and therefore not universal (catholic).
Since then the filioque has been progressively dropped from the recitation of the creed in the Roman Catholic Church.
But does that make them orthodox? No of course.
The other main problem was the supreme juridiction of the Roman pontiffs over the Church although the Tiara has been dropped as well.
End of the story. For now.
Lord have mercy upon me the talkative sinner. ☦
I really appreciate this series, from which I have learned much.
Though actually a lapsed Roman Catholic who still respects the tradition and see value in it, I too tend to see Orthodox churches as being the closest ones to the version of catholicism I'm most familiar with and, indeed, to see them as sharing the same direct descent from the universalist (aka "catholic") orthodoxy of the early Church fathers.
I certainly have never begrudged the Orthodox the characteristic features of their tradition. (In many respects, I tend to favour Orthodox practices in relation to, say, the marriage of priests and the look and feel of their churches and services.) That said, both still face obvious challenges in adapting to the modern world, particularly as relates to the role of women in positions of authority...
Jeez there’s too many commercials today.
Why should be divided as jesus christ is only one I thought this is only money problem
❤
It's fascinating how the Orthodox Church is not orthodox on the issues of contraception and divorce while the Catholic Church is orthodox on those issues.
Contraception is banned in the Orthodox Church, including NFP which is allowed by the Roman See.
As for the Marriage issue, an annulment is a divorce in everything but name. The Children don't become bastards, since their parents were never married, there is a split of means and goods and both parties can petition to remarry.
In Orthodoxy divorce is a sin and second marriages are very rarely allowed, let alone thirds.
This is all laid forth in St. Basil's Canons, which is accepted by both East and West.
@@acekoala457 clearly you didn't watch the video
There is no Orthodox Church, only 17 autocephalous Orthodox churches. Everyone of which has split up with some part returning to communion with Rome. This is why the Catholic Church is made up of 24 sui iuris churches, only one of which is the Roman "Catholic" church.
In practice though, the Orthodox church is considerably more orthodox given that the divorce rate among Orthodox is way lower than the divorce rate among Catholics. And while I won’t get into the nitty gritty of it, in Orthodox confession (since most Orthodox parishes are smaller than Catholic parishes in the West) is very… personal, and it’s very common for priests/spiritual fathers to advise literally each and every married parishioner on matters of contraception to make sure they are all in line with what the Church teaches is acceptable/unacceptable methods. My Catholic friends will say that their priests make general statements, but it doesn’t seem like there’s the deep personal and confessional connection in this particular matter between Catholic parishioners and their priests. Just my experience!!
Just got home from mass and saw this 😂
I grew up jehovahs witness and didn't know any of this, all the while thinking my religion was true lol
May I ask, what tradition/denomination/sect do you follow now?
@@St.MartinofToursPrayToGodForUs none, I'm full blown atheist but I have deep respect for orthodoxy, even though it's probably wrong biblically and the JWs got a lot of things right
@@cygnustsp not only is Orthodoxy biblical, but the Bible stems from and is part of Orthodox tradition. It was Orthodox bishops who compiled it in the first place.
@@cygnustsp then why are you atheist? If JW got a lot of things right? What is it that makes you full blown atheist?
@@highviewbarbell yep. That's pretty much it. Blessed feast of the Holy Cross!
W CATHOLIC 💯
We kept the faith on contraceptives and divorce, the gates of hades will not prevail.
Just get an annulment
That's why so many annulments are accorded. Most Catholics don't follow Humanae Vitae anyway.
Are you aware the Coptic Orthodox Church recently suspended dialogue with the Roman Catholic Church because Pope Francis publicly announced that sodomite blessings could be given?
Please note: I'm not saying that's what Pope Francis' statement said. I'm saying that's what the Copts understood it to mean and that is why, according to their own announcement, they suspended dialogue.
Is this what Jesus said or what man said?
@@Ggdivhjkjl As a Catholic, the Copts were right to suspend dialogue. Many Catholic dioceses around the world have outright refused to obey his directive. The entire Catholic church in Africa has refused to bless gay couples as well. Francis is not a good Pope. It's not only the Orthodox who think so, but the majority of Catholics as well.
What it is so mind-boggling that the sign of the Cross was done the orthodox way for the fist 1190 years even in Rome until 1190 AD then it was reversed. a Roman Deacon who later became Pope Innocent III witnessed that some people in Rome had started to make the sign of the Cross in the opposite direction so since then it has become the typical western way.
Although we know that the Cross originated in Apostolic times.
The sign of the cross is only done by those who are outside of the kingdom of God. Please show me where the Bible tells us to make the sign of the cross?
Anyone who makes the sign of the cross is showing themselves to be the accursed of God.
@@forthosewithearstohear6219 my dear friend Early christians used to trace a little cross on their foreheads. They associated the practice with references in Ezekiel 9:7 and Revelation 7:3, 9:4, and 14:1, all which describe believers bearing God's seal on their foreheads. Unfortunately you believe in sola scriptura and you need more Christian education than if is not in the bible....
Not everything we do is in the bible and again which of the 600 different mistranslated bibles you have. For example we believe in a Trinitarian God, however the word Trinity it doesn't appear in the bible. The sign of the cross was learned from the Apostles, and also administered in Baptisms. This is a problem for the protestants who protested against Rome but instead of returning to the original Church that Jesus built they went their own ways and know we have 45,000 different protestant denominations and growing weekly. The Church that Jesus Built put together the bible you are reading but since it was some time mistranslated from the Greek on purpose to fit your particular group's thinking there are bibles out there that are missing pages upon pages from the real bible.
Regardless know days people are coming to the Church that Jesus built because we have vast access to information and are able to come to the Church that Jesus built. One Holy Catholic (not Roman) and Apostolic Church that for 2000 years has not changed.
@@kyriakosaronis4872 @kyriakosaronis4872 ,...Yes, everything fake christians do is not in the Bible, it is all unbiblical manmade nonsense.
The trinity is a perfect example of the unbiblical, false, manmade nonsense you believe. There is no trinity! The trinity is a 100% false manmade CONcept as is everything you believe.
You did not learn the sign of the cross from the apostles. You learned all the 100% unbiblical nonsense you believe in, hold to, and practice, from your ungodly, blind, lost, and deceived fathers.
Anyone who in not in protest against the catholics/orthodox/rome, the apostolic, and whatever else you all hold to, cannot possible be a Christian. Your church is a 100% Godless, manmade fraud.
Where does the Bible tall us to make a little cross across our foreheads, or to make and kind of sign of the cross? The fact is, it doesn't, and in reality, tells us to have nothing to do with all these false manmade acts of ignorance.
You, and your whole fake manmade religion is a manmade, Godless, abomination. You are all the accursed of God and will all be cast into the lake of fire. However, you all being spiritually dead and blind, as well as completely Biblically illiterate will reject the truth I have given for your edification and will just go right back to your wallowing in the mire.
You are all vessels of wrath and brute beasts made only to be destroyed just as your Godless fathers were. Repent!
@@forthosewithearstohear6219why do you assume the Bible is the only source of theological knowledge?
@@triggered8556 ,...I do not assume anything. I know with 100% certainty that the Bible and its 66 books are the only thing God has spoken/given to the world. There is no other source of truth other than the 66 books of the Bible.
If anyone looks outside of these 66 books, they will only be deceived, and this is exactly why everything known as the church is all 100% apostate. Every man of God has one book in their library, the Bible. Again, if anyone looks to anything else, they are not a Christian, they are just another totally blind, lost, and deceived fake christian and a vessel of Gods wrath made only to be destroyed.
Great
The idea to treat these churches in the same way you would denominations has really undermined the whole project. There is no Orthodox Church, only 17 autocephalous Orthodox churches, every one of which has split up with some part returning to communion with the Roman church. Hence we can speak of a Catholic Church made up 24 sui iuris churches, only one of which is the Roman "Catholic" church, and so every difference you mention, all arbitrary and some mistaken, is really a difference that exists within the Universal, i.e. Catholic, Church.
There is indeed an Orthodox church. You do know what synodality is, don't you?
There are disagreements, just as there are within the Catholic church.
Nevertheless, the fact is everything called orthodox and catholic is all 100% apostate from God and are nothing but false manmade Godless religions. They are the religions of the accursed of God.
But what does the teaching of Romans and Hebrews both give the teaching of the Christian church not found in these church teachings
Like what?
I wonder if MLK would be considered a Saint
Considering he denied the virgin birth and was never in communion with Catholics or Orthodox he would never be considered for canonization. That being said I believe the ELCA and episcopal church consider him a saint and celebrate him on January 15th
I'm not sure... probably, yes. I'm Eastern Orthodox and as far as I know we think of anyone who made it to heaven as a saint. Some are known, others are unknown. We also don't think that only Eastern Orthodox people can go to heaven and that at the end of the day, it's God's decision. So regarding MLK, his public career was positive, but I'm not sure about his private life. I've heard less flattering things about his private life, like him cheating. So... overall, eh, why not? I've seen more flawed individuals be recognized as saints.
Why he even should be? He was neither Catholic nor Orthodox. In terms of black American Catholic saints then there is venerable Augustus Tolton, who is in process to become a saint (he already completed step 1 and 2 mentioned in this video)
Wasn’t he adulterous?
Being a communist is a very easy way to not be viewed favorably by the orthodox church
You are grossly mispronouncing "imprimatur"... it makes my ears bleed.
It’s not levioSaaa, it’s imprimAAAtur
That’s how it’s pronounced via Anglicization. Calm down.
@@j.athanasius9832 no it isn’t,
Wonder why the Orthodox haven't updated their canons since before the Great Schism....despite the Orthodox always claiming to be the apex of all tradition, Catholics are more traditional in the sense that they have carried on the living, breathing spirit of the first millennium Church by continuing to add canons. The Orthodox in this regard seem...dead (no offense, I love Orthodoxy!). Why?
we consider the development of doctrine by the Pope to be one of Rome's heresies. we continue the faith of the Church fathers and valid ecumenical councils.
Except we have?
The Anathema against Protestantism in 1672, the Anathema against the Ecumenists in the 1800s.
The Orthodox Church doesn't act in reaction to Rome.
@@BaikalTii I'm aware! That is common knowledge. Do you know why the Orthodox added new universal canons for the first thousand years but haven't added any since the 10th century?
@@SamDiMento ,...You are all completely steeped in darkness, deception, and in a 100% antichrist christianity. You are all snared into everything the Bible warned you not to be deceived by, Repent, all of you!
11:53 we call those heretics.
Especially since the pill is abortiform
The Orthodox church does not approve of any contraception that kills a fertilized egg. We are just more tolerant of things like condoms that prevent fertilization.
Of course. 🧐
There are plenty of non-abortifacient contraceptives… what are you talking about?
@@kevinlionel572 the condom is non-abortiform, the spponge, the diafragm. All the pills are abortiform in contrast and "modern" i.e. satanic women all prefer the pill. While with the others you may make a case of their use even for the christians for the pill there is no case to make
Ye must be born again!
Yes, that's why we baptize.
It literally read/means: "born from above" from koine Greek.
That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit. Water baptism won’t do a thing to save you.
According to the Bible, a sinner is born again /born of the Spirit the moment he trusts Jesus Christ as his own personal Saviour. If you’re still trusting in your baptism or your church or your works, then you’ve never trusted Jesus Christ. Jesus is exclusive.
“That we should be to the praise of his glory, who first trusted in Christ. In whom ye also trusted, after that ye heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation: in whom also after that ye believed, ye were sealed with that holy Spirit of promise” - Ephesians 1:12-13 KJV
@@RealBobEvans The Bible literally says baptism saves you.
@@RealBobEvans Christ commands us to baptize, and we are told that baptism saves. We don't know everything that baptism does, certainly we know some of the works that God does through baptism. But others are a mystery. He commands us to be baptized, and that it saves, how it saves is somewhat of a mystery. But, it is safe to trust Jesus Christ for our salvation. May the Lord Jesus Christ have mercy on me, a sinner.
Salvation is by faith alone in the Lord Jesus Christ alone! He said “it is finished”! Believe on him as your personal Saviour and be saved today!
You cannot add works, otherwise you’re just trusting in yourself like every other religion. Trust Jesus Christ alone! You must receive the free gift of salvation that Jesus offers.
“For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast.” - Ephesians 2:8-9 KJV
“Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus” - Romans 3:24 KJV
“But these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through his name.” - John 20:31 KJV
Yep!
"Faith without works is dead faith." --The Epistle of James. IOW, it won't save you.
@@tclearytcleary James 2 does not teach that faith plus works save, otherwise it would be contradicting John 3:16, Ephesians 2:8-9, Romans 5:1, Galatians 2:16 and numerous other verses that state we're saved by faith apart from works. God looks inward and sees a man’s heart. We are justified in God’s eyes by faith alone.
“Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law.” - Romans 3:28 KJV
Man looks at the outward appearance. So if someone is preaching about faith, but they have no works to back it up, they look like fools. That is why James 2 says we need works so that we can be a faithful witness of Jesus Christ to people.
The works do not save us though. Works play no part in salvation. The faith in Jesus Christ is what saves. The Holy Bible says that we are saved the moment that we truly trust Jesus Christ as our Saviour.
“In whom we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins, according to the riches of his grace… That we should be to the praise of his glory, who first trusted in Christ. In whom ye also trusted, after that ye heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation: in whom also after that ye believed, ye were sealed with that holy Spirit of promise” - Ephesians 1:7,12-13 KJV
“Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life.” - John 5:24 KJV
After we are already saved, then God will start to work in us and work good works through us. But those works do not cause salvation.
“For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast. For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them.” - Ephesians 2:8-10 KJV
Why did he say, "It is finished?" What was finished and what demarcated it? I bet you don't have even a remotest clue.
@@JudeMalachi What was finished? - God's redemption of mankind. Jesus paid for all of the world's sins by shedding his blood on the cross. He purchased us with his own blood.
"And you, being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh, hath he quickened together with him, having forgiven you all trespasses; Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross" - Colossians 2:13-14 KJV
"...to feed the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood." - Acts 20:28 KJV
What demarcated it? - His death on the cross. Jesus lived the perfect sinless life that we could not. He died for the sins of the world on the cross. And immediately afterward the veil of the temple was ripped in half to show that we no longer go through priests or OT sacrifices to get to God. Now we get to God directly through Jesus Christ and his righteousness.
"And, having made peace through the blood of his cross, by him to reconcile all things unto himself; by him, I say, whether they be things in earth, or things in heaven. And you, that were sometime alienated and enemies in your mind by wicked works, yet now hath he reconciled In the body of his flesh through death, to present you holy and unblameable and unreproveable in his sight" - Colossians 1:20-22 KJV
"For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus" - 1 Timothy 2:5 KJV
"And every priest standeth daily ministering and offering oftentimes the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins: But this man, after he had offered one sacrifice for sins for ever, sat down on the right hand of God" - Hebrews 10:11-12 KJV
What should be your response to this? - Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and thou shalt be saved. Don't add your religion/church/traditions. Don't add your own good works or supposed righteousness. Trust Jesus Christ and him alone as your personal Saviour. When you believe on Jesus Christ, God will impute the righteousness of Christ to your account. You will enter heaven based on Christ's perfect righteousness, and his alone. Trying to add your own righteousness to Christ's finished work will only result in you falling way short. God bless!
"For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast." - Ephesians 2:8-9 KJV
"In whom we have redemption through his blood, even the forgiveness of sins" - Colossians 1:14 KJV
"And brought them out, and said, Sirs, what must I do to be saved? And they said, Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved, and thy house." - Acts 16:30-31 KJV
"For he hath made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him." - 2 Corinthians 5:21 KJV
"For they being ignorant of God's righteousness, and going about to establish their own righteousness, have not submitted themselves unto the righteousness of God. For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to every one that believeth." - Romans 10:3-4 KJV