Became Orthodox after 23 years in a Protestant sect. My entire family, my sister's family and my sister-in-law's family got baptized recently. In total, 13 people joined the church, plus two of my friends followed too. That's amazing. Our lives have changed beyond description. Glory to God 🙏🏻☦️💜🎶 A lot of people here in Canada are joining the Church ☦️
I'm confused. Were you not already baptised into Jesus Christ as a protestant? I'll never understand why people get multiple "salvations" or multiple "baptisms." Are you not just crucifying Jesus again? Or saying the first time wasn't good enough? "christians" confuse me. And I AM a Christian.
@@stuntman083 Amazing. Protestants have no grace. I'm positive that the message of salvation is so simple that even a child understands it. There are no differing baptisms or salvations, there's only 1. So to keep doing it over and over is redundant and putting Jesus back on the cross over and over. Ridiculous human actions. Have a nice day.
@@solomansam1 Orthodox by definition will concern matters of the truth. Christ has established the Orthodox Church so my comment isn't intended to dim the lights of other religious traditions but spotlight the True Religion, Orthodox Christianity.
Thank you so much Hank for doing this you are one of the main reasons I started looking into the eastern orthodox faith. I was a protestant and i listen to your show for years and you lead me to the true church God bless you.
I've been basically a divine leaning agnostic for my entire life of 55 years and recently have been feeling drawn to orthodoxy and this discussion is very comforting and confirming of my suspicion that this is the ONLY path for me to begin my repentance and finally find God
Really enjoyed this presentation. I've had an interest in Orthodoxy for several years, but just haven't been able to pull the trigger. I look forward, Hank, to hearing more on Orthodoxy in the future from you. God's blessings
I listened to your podcast about seven years ago. You were talking about the word Theosis. This led me on a path to read the Church fathers which led me to be chrismated into the Orthodox Church a couple of years later. Thank you for allowing God to work through you.
Great conversation! I'm a convert to Orthodoxy of just over 10 years now and wild horses couldn't drag me away. I've found home after years of wondering.
Wonderful discussion :). Thank you Mr Hanegraaff, I just finished your very substantive book Truth Matters, Life Matters More…..I wish to be able to convert to Orthodoxy…. will be in Charlotte this weekend and plan to attend St Nektarios, so Lord willing I can meet you if that is acceptable…..glory to God
You should probably note female deacons historically were not interchangeable with male deacons. Rather they filled a specific role in the catechizing of females and some monastery roles. 1:08:48
The problem should not be the "Icon." No, the problem is "Omnipresence." Anyone who blames an icon is seriously missing the point. Icons, which cannot hear nor see, cannot hear our accusations. Our prayer directly to a saint, who has gone before us, implies that the departed saint can be assumed to have a measure of omnipresence, which is specifically an attribute belonging to God alone. Forget blaming icons.
I was surprised I didn’t see any negative or anti ortho comments (well except a few) from evangelicals in this thread. Normally in any Ortho video you get endless typical evangelicals or Protestants saying something like “Orthodoxy and man made rituals won’t save you, we are not to worship anything but God/Christ alone. Praying to saints and Mary is idolatry. Also manmade rituals all of which were added much later and is not biblical. Trust in Christ and have a relationship with him and Read the Bible! We ought to study the Bible and trust in Christ only and not in man made rituals! And then they post some random out of context Bible verses …. 🤦♂️
I don’t believe nematological is a real word and even if it is only a poor communicator, would use such a word. I love orthodoxy and the richness of orthodoxy but if we want to reach others with our best kept secret, we need to talk so that others can understand or it just turns them away, and makes it look like a smarter than thou group of so-called theologians that only want to impress each other. I don’t mean to say this in a mean way, I would just like orthodoxy to reach the masses. I’ve listened to you, Hank for a long time, prayed with you through your sickness, and received a blessing from a lot of this podcast.
Thanks for this. As a woman desiring to become Orthodox im overwhelmed by the male presence in The church this was so refreshing to hear a strong intelligent female . Mother Mary was an evangelist and women were deacons in the early centuries. Why did it stop?
Eastern Orthodoxy recognizes many female saints and honors them as equal to the Apostles. The veneration of the Virgin Mary, i.e., Theotokos, is a well-established tradition within Eastern Orthodoxy. On the other hand, there has never been the ordination of female priests or bishops in the history of Orthodoxy. To find out more, see the section on the ordination of women in A Basic Guide to Eastern Orthodox Theology: Introducing Beliefs and Practices by Eve Tibbs www.equip.org/product/a-basic-guide-to-eastern-orthodox-theology-introducing-beliefs-and-practices/ Also listen to Hank's interview w/ Eve Tibbs > www.equip.org/hank-unplugged-podcast-and-shorts/western-guide-to-eastern-orthodoxy/
I am a single woman who was also drawn to orthodoxy and am being carechised. I do agree it is more rare to see women convert on their own, but take heart, I pray your parish quickly becomes a family to you as mine is to me!
God doesn't allow a women to teach in the church congeration 1 Tim 2v 11 woman must learn in quietness and full submissiveness. 12I do not permit a woman to teach or to exercise authority over a man; she is to remain quiet. 13For Adam was formed first, and then Eve. 14And it was not Adam who was deceived, but the woman who was deceived and fell into transgression. 15Women, however, will be saved through childbearing, if they continue in faith, love, and holiness, with self-control. woman must learn in quietness and full submissiveness. 12I do not permit a woman to teach or to exercise authority over a man;c she is to remain quiet. 13For Adam was formed first, and then Eve. 14And it was not Adam who was deceived, but the woman who was deceived and fell into transgression. 15Women, however, will be savedd through childbearing, if they continue in faith, love, and holiness, with self-control.
@@BibleAnswerMan thanks so much,, I will read! yes I agree and am happy about no female priests etc. My statement was around deacons, evangelists and preachers.
@@topcatcoolio8807 it is true. Please read my comment again. You misunderstood I think. I wouldn't go near a church with a female priest or bishop! Lol
Listened to 30' 33'' and so far nothing I would have been surprised to hear from my Roman Catholic priest.. especially about the communion of saints. (no doubt the teaching was badly distorted in Luther's time.. we RCs have to take blame for that). I'm surprised I don't more often hear E. Orthodox teachers speak of Aquinas' experience late in life that led him to put down his pen..
I’m just confused more than ever. I grew up Catholic, and then when I turned 18 I became an atheist first a few years. After that I became a born again Protestant and I was in a few different Protestant churches over the years. I even attended a seventh day Adventist church for a year. Recently I discovered the orthodox faith. And with all these different denominations saying they are correct, orthodox saying they are correct. I find myself more confused than ever before. Who is right? It is just a roll of the dice?
@michaelkish7794 The situation you describe is understandable. All church denominations ultimately arose out of sin. See www.equip.org/articles/what-denomination-should-i-join/ Obviously, it is illogical to say each schism is true. So, one cannot affirm both the Trinity and Modalism. One is true and the other false or both are false. But there is reason to believe the Trinity corresponds to the reality of the divine revelation given to us from God. But Christians are to strive for the unity that Jesus prayed His followers have in John 17. Please listen to these Hank Unplugged episodes: Hank Unplugged Episode #105 - The Key to Christian Unity is Humility with Francis Chan and Metropolitan Yohan | www.equip.org/unplugged/the-key-to-christian-unity-is-humility-with-francis-chan-and-metropolitan-yohan/, Hank Unplugged Episode #53 - Special Edition: The Doctrine of Unity | www.equip.org/hank-unplugged-podcast-and-shorts/doctrine-of-unity-with-hank-hanegraaff/ and Hank Unplugged: Episode #101 - Fission or Fusion? A Call for Christian Unity with Nathan Jacobs | www.equip.org/unplugged/fission-or-fusion-a-call-for-christian-unity-with-nathan-jacobs/ We strongly recommend checking out the section on Fusion in Hank Hanegraaff’s Truth Matters, Life Matters More: The Unexpected Beauty of an Authentic Christian Life | www.equip.org/product/truth-matters-life-matters-more/
Definitely some issues with prayer to saints and infant baptism. If it wasn’t for this, I’d be in. I was baptized Greek Orthodox as a baby, but when I read the Bible, had an issue with those two doctrines.
I've been reading and studying the Orthodox Church for a couple of years. There are a couple of things I'm having trouble wrapping my head around (prayers to saints/Mary for example). But I think the hardest thing is that there doesn't seem to be an assurance of salvation. I've seen videos of priests saying they don't know they are going to heaven when they die(!) Can anyone shed some light on this?
@xnihilo1044 What we never find in Scriptures is a transactional faith. We just do not sign on a dotted line, we’re in, and that’s that, everything is set. Hank stresses the importance of experiencing life with God in the deification journey. Vladimir Lossky puts it this way: “After the Fall, human history is a long shipwreck awaiting rescue: but the port of salvation is not the goal; it is the possibility for the shipwrecked to resume his journey whose sole goal is union with God.” But even in Calvinist traditions there are those who feel as if they are non-elect and they lack any assurance of salvation. There is more to the picture than meets the eye. The problem is a disconnection with Christ and the Church or Community of Christ. This is important for the Christian to be in fellowship within the context of a healthy well-balanced Church. You may still have moments of doubt, but it is within the body of Christ that we find encouragement, prayer, and if necessary, correction.
@@BibleAnswerMan Thank you very much for taking the time to answer my question. From a Confessional Lutheran background, assurance of salvation is paramount. I read once that Luther said, "Salvation without assurance is no salvation at all." It made me wonder if faithful Orthodox fear death thinking salvation could be a toss of the coin.
Therefore, my beloved, just as you have always obeyed, not only in my presence, but now even more in my absence, continue to work out your salvation with fear and trembling. Php 2:12 Why fear and trembling if it’s a slam dunk? “Fear not, little flock, for it is your Father’s good pleasure to give you the kingdom.” Luke 12:32 At the same time, God desires all to be saved.
there is a good video titled something like Orthodoxy 101 - Salvation… found it helpful, but with ya on praying to anyone else other then the Lord…mmmm🤔
Does the Orthodox Church allow its members to read the Bible for themselves, and does the church encourage this? Coming from an evangelical/protestant background we were told to read the Bible everyday. Thanks! I’m sure I’ll have many more questions.
Yes. All Orthodox Christians ought to read the Scriptures. No Christian regardless of denominational affiliation has ever been permitted to read the Scriptures, twist its central message, and teach the perversion to others. So, the Ancient Alien interpretation of Ezekiel 1 is a space-ship launch. Such is a novel doctrinal innovation imposed upon the biblical text. Each Christians reads the Scriptures or hears them being read, and memorize them. But we all still submit to the teachings from the Scriptures given by those whom God has gifted, taught, and called to be pastor/teachers over the flock. See www.equip.org/articles/the-imprudence-of-solo-scriptura/ Listen to Hank’s interview w/ Edith Humphrey on Scripture and Tradition ruclips.net/video/XQXB1DWUsPI/видео.html Please also consult Humphrey’s book cripture and Tradition What the Bible Really Says www.equip.org/product/cri-resource-scripture-and-tradition-what-the-bible-really-says/
All my life in Greece i hear every priest to say: not be lazy, brothers, read the Bible from the original text better every day . If something is not clear we are here to explain. Also that God's Grace opens our eyes to understand
8:00 "one undivided church" until the 11th Century? What about the Oriental Orthodox which I believe includes the Coptics, Assyrian, and Ethiopian Churches?
@markstuber4731 For the sects that identify as non-Chalcedonian, whether Coptic, Assyrian, or Ethiopian, they are continuing in the way of ancient schisms did over a thousand years ago. . See . www.equip.org/article/how-was-orthodoxy-established-in-the-ecumenical-councils/
@@BibleAnswerMan I clearly did not state or insinuate that all religions lead to God. My concern is that all the faithful believers in the other denominations will be condemned as a result of not being members of the Orthodox Church. ✔️
Thank you for this information. I've been seeking diligently everything orthodox as I am so unfulfilled and dissatisfied in the shallowness of western 'religion'. My husband is hung up on a question about baptism that I hope you can help with. 'WHY must you be baptised in the orthodox faith when the thief on the cross clearly wasn't baptised yet Christ said he would join Him in paradise.' Also Christ told the woman at the well to go and sin no more but He didn't say 'get baptized'. Any insight into this would be greatly appreciated as I'm exhausted trying to 'win my husband over' to orthodoxy. I realize we each have our own path to God, but it'd sure be nice if we could find common ground in this most important search for truth. I would greatly appreciate any links or must read books to help in this journey.
I fully understand that neither Roman Catholicism nor Eastern Orthodoxy are saying that Mary is omniscient. No, according to the official statement of the Eastern Orthodox belief about Mary and the other Biblical Saints, and the official statement of belief of the same, in the Roman Catholic Church, their official statements do not use the term omniscient. The option to assume the said ultimatum, in definition of practice, while avoiding the term "Omnipresence" as the word to use, exists in the "Unofficial" belief that Mary was bodily resurrected (6th century). None of the present official belief statements, neither in the Roman Catholic Church, nor the Eastern Orthodox Church, can specifically use the term "Omniscience." It is only permitted, without using the said term officially, for people, in R.C. and E.O., to believe the said ultimatum, based on the E.O. official beliefs both of Mary's perpetual virginity (649), and of Mary's higher form of intercession (8th century), along with and the unofficial belief, that we can assume that Mary was bodily resurrected (6th century). Mary as Theotokos is Biblical. Here is the Eastern Orthodox assertion on Mary and The other Saints in heaven: Mary as the Theotokos (Christ bearer) - 431. Mary's perpetual virginity (649). NOTE: There is an option to assume here in this official belief. Mary's intercession (Mediatrix) considered to be a higher form than the intercession of the other heavenly saints, though she does not equal nor usurp the Chief intercession of the Most High God (8th Century). NOTE: It is God the Father, through God the Son, only, who hears the prayers of the Saints on earth, and it is God the Holy Spirit who prays for the Saints here on earth, all accomplished for us, by the substitutionary atonement of God the Son. Because Mary and the Saints, while on earth, believed that the only Son of God was the Saviour, they are in heaven with Christ forever, although It is God Himself who may give Mary or other Saints in heaven the message of our activities and earthly needs, by our prayers to God only, and by the prayers of the Holy Spirit. We can ask Christ to send us the Holy Spirit, from the Father, to pray for us on earth. This is Biblically assured (No assumption, and no doubt). Optional Non-official Doctrine: Mary's Assumption as bodily resurrected after her death, and assumed to heaven (6th century). There is the option to assume here in this unofficial belief.
Econ.... that makes sense. That would be why he told Moses about the snake that was raised to heal. Then Jesus said the same way the snake was raised. So will the Son of Man be.
But overall Hank I am glad your one step away from "Rome Sweet Home." You have taught me a lot, greatly appreciate you and will be praying for your health.
I admire Orthodox saints, Orthodox heartfelteness, simplicity, truthfulness. But sometimes I see that tsome Orthodoxs prefer ancient greek philosophers more than the word of God. I think verbal tradition is good, but it must stay accountable to the word of God always.
I think the Orthodox Church sees that Scripture was orally and written down within the Church, not from above or outside or independent of the church. Scripture does not claim within it that it is to be above the church but interpreted within. For scripture tells us that it is the church that is the pillar and foundation of Truth. And Christ tells us that He IS the Truth. This makes sense since Christ is the Head of the Church, the Body. So scripture is seen within the context of how it developed within the church rather than as outside and above the church. Scripture is held in the highest of esteem. If you ever go to an Orthodox liturgy you will see that the singing, chanting, teaching is saturated with the psalms, epistles, gospel, prayer. It’s akin to the Founding Fathers who developed the US constitution. There was a lengthy process and it was finally solidified. Through their letters to each other, we know what the FF meant and we trust their interpretation of the documents bc they wrote them. Much more so than later scholars who come along and put their own worldviews upon the text. Of course, the analogy isn’t precise bc God’s word is inspired, the USC is not. But it may help to understand more how the Orthodox Church sees things vs how Protestant churches may see things through the lens of 1500-2000+ years later. One views as from within and the other looking from a different perspective sees scripture as coming from above. But if you think through how scripture actually developed, it becomes more clear that this is not the case. Unlike Islam and LDS, there wasn’t a book laid out and finished for the believers to follow. The books and letters within Christianity were developed within the Jewish and Christian age and led by the Holy Spirit. Very different phenomena.
@FrankFriedrich-lc6ie Are you speaking of Herman of Alaska who brought Orthodoxy to Alaska? Never commented on the St. Herman per se. What inspiration have you received from the life of St. Herman?
Eve Tibbs would say “Neither Anselm’s satisfaction model nor the Reformers’ substitutionary model of Christ’s atoning work has resonated within Eastern Orthodoxy. One simple reason for this is that both models offered solutions to what had not been the primary problems of humanity in Orthodox thought. There are certainly elements of truth in both Western models - a cosmic problem occurred, and Jesus is the solution. Yet, from an orthodox perspective, neither of these views provide a solution to an identified problem, and they are too narrowly limited in context to provide a universe remedy. (A Basic Guide to Eastern Orthodox Theology p. 118 - www.equip.org/product/cri-resource-a-basic-guide-to-eastern-orthodox-theology-introducing-beliefs-and-practices/ ) That Colossians 2:13-14 hints at penal substitution is never denied, but Colossians 2:15 depicts the defeat of the powers of darkness through the cross, so Christus Victor. Thus, there is more to the picture. The observation from Timothy Ware is apropos… "Where Orthodoxy sees chiefly Christ the Victor, the late medieval and post-medieval west sees chiefly Christ the Victim. While Orthodoxy interprets the Crucifixion primarily as an act of triumphant victory over the powers of evil, the west-particularly since the time of Anselm of Canterbury (?1033-1109)-has tended to rather think of the Cross in penal and juridical terms, as an act of satisfaction designated to propitiate the wrath of an angry Father. Yet these contrast must not be pressed too far. Eastern writers, as well as western writers, have applied judicial and penal language to the Crucifixion; western writers, as well as eastern, have never ceased to think of Good Friday as a moment of victory. In the west from the 1930s onwards there has been a revival of the Patristic idea of Christus Victor, alike in theology, in spirituality, and in art; and Orthodox are naturally very happy that this should be so" (Timothy Ware, The Orthodox Church: An Introduction to Eastern Christianity, p., 223 - www.equip.org/product/the-orthodox-church-an-introduction-to-eastern-christianity/ )
The Early Church forbidden images because of the second commandment how do the Orthodox church justify using them now and immediately not trying to cause confusion I'm a Pentecostal and thinking on becoming Orthodox but this is me only stumbling block please help me understand
This article is a book review we published but it will answer your question about icons. From the article "Iconography has a theological coherence to it, a symbolic grammar, in which each part of an icon is connected to every other part, and every icon is in conversation with a host of others. Icons exist in relation to time (the liturgical calendar and church history) as well as space (church architecture and the placement of icons within the church). Just as a verbal language is composed of an alphabet, words, sentences, grammar and syntax, paragraphs, and an overarching meaning, so do all the parts and wholes of iconography fit together and live within the church’s liturgical worship, theological tradition, and biblical interpretation." www.equip.org/articles/beautiful-union-by-joshua-ryan-butler-and-the-trouble-with-borrowing-icons/
Also we have published another article about icons you can read. "John of Damascus and His Defense of Icons" www.equip.org/articles/john-of-damascus-and-his-defense-of-icons/
@joshlin9693 Yes. Both adults and infants receive Trinitarian water baptism by immersion, chrismation and the Lord’s Supper together. Chrismation is tied with the Seal of the Gift of the Holy Spirit.
I never felt at home in the evangelical churches I’ve attend over the years. The Orthodox Church really intrigues me. And I do want to attend one. But, there are a few things holding me back. 1. Mary, and praying to dead saints 2. Kissing objects and believing God resides in them. 3. Kissing the hand of the priest. 4. The Eucharist becomes the literal body of Christ. These are the things holding me back. If anyone has any clarification please share. Thanks!
Here are some podcasts by Hank to help you out. "Mary: Does the Mother of God Matter to Us? (Hank Unplugged Podcast)" ruclips.net/video/GSPaNF2Kh80/видео.html "Is Christ Present in the Eucharist? Francis Chan, Hank Hanegraaff & KP Yohannan (Hank Unplugged)" ruclips.net/video/OSyTJaTufcw/видео.html "Understanding Eastern Orthodoxy with Nathan Jacobs (Hank Unplugged Podcast)" ruclips.net/video/hm3hh0ZT6I0/видео.html
@barryjohnson436 Good question. Hank and Eve Tibbs were mainly talking the explication of Eastern Orthodox theology. The discussion went another direction than addressing the epistemological question of what makes the proposition of Eastern Orthodox theology correspondent to reality against say other theological proposition, like Judaism, Islam, Buddhis, Hinduism, or ancient alien theory? When it comes to the truth proposition of Eastern Orthodox theology against other truth propositions like the theological propositions of Judaism, Islam, Buddhism, Hinduism, or ancient alien theory, the theologies are all antithetical to one another. Judaism and Islam reject the Trinity, but the Trinity is essential to Eastern Orthodoxy. Eastern Orthodoxy upholds the Creator/creature distinction (God is uncreated whereas we are the created). Yet, Hinduism the distinction between the Supreme One and the person is blurred. Many Hindus will embrace pantheistic monism, or the idea that all is One and the One is Divine. For Buddhist the question of God is irrelevant. For the Eastern Orthodoxy, Christianity is life in the Trinity and the goal of life is deification or theosis. Either one of these beliefs is true to the extent that all the others are false or all of them are false and another theological proposition is true. The impossible and illogical thing is the believe they are basically the same. It is the resurrection of Jesus that distinguishes Christianity, Eastern Orthodoxy in particular, from the rest, and lends epistemic warrant to the theological truth proposition confessed and professed by the Eastern Orthodox.
Hank, I listened to you for years. I supported your ministry, I have most of your books. Now everything you taught and believed is completely different. Can't you see how devastating this is to your followers. Now all we learned from you is wrong. And how can life matter more than truth? I have been devasted by this. I respected you so much and now I'm heartbroken I don't see why you can't understand how this makes your followers feel.
Should Hank have continued to teach what he now believes to be wrong just for the sake of those listening to him? Then he would be purposefully deceiving you! How rare it is for someone of large influence to repent and actually change their ways. Thank God for Hank!
I've listened to hank for years and have no problem with his change. I even explored eastern orthodox and like it though I don't feel called to join them. At the end of the day Christ died for are sins and they believe that. God Bless
I have researched Orthodoxy also. I even made an appointment with a priest. I was going to try it since I respect Hank but after finding out what they believe I couldn't go. Jesus isn't enough, prayers for the dead., Icons, deification,. I believe we will do works if we are truly saved. All protestants believe that. But just how much works do you have to do to receive God's mercy Also the Holy Trinity has always been very important to me
@@andrettanylund830 first of all they do believe in the trinity so whoever told you that was very wrong. also salvation is more looked at as a process. not works, it's like a tree that keeps growing. to stay nourished you have to keep drinking water and feeding the body. if you don't what happens so that's how they look at it. though i don't feel I will ever join there church I'm confident in saying that in heaven I will see Hank & many other Eastern orthodox brothers & sisters. I think I will see you also, God Bless
I apologize, but I have another question. This is my understanding of hell. That those who rejected Jesus Christ as their savior will spend eternity in hell, away from the presence of God. The other view is that God will destroy the wicked, and Satan, and his angels they will be burned up and turned into Ash. Those people will exist anymore, even in eternity.however the orthodox church seems to have a different view. That those people will still be in the presence of Christ even though they rejected him. Can you explain this in a little more detail? Or direct me to a video? I would like to find out more about this. Thank you so much.
Praying directly to the Mother of Jesus, who is now in heaven, is implying that Mary is omniscient. The Eastern Orthodox try to make it look like some other practice, but if the saints, who have gone before us, can hear us directly, such as what the Eastern Orthodox feel comforted in believing, then they believe that Mary is omniscient, no matter how they talk around the definition. The Bible gives absolutely no indication that Mary or the saints can hear our prayers directly. Mary and the saints are not omniscient. Even glorified in heaven, they are still finite beings with limitations. Not even the Seven Ecumenical Councils give any support to us asking a saint, who has departed, to hear us directly.
@thy-ine nobody is claiming the Virgin Mary is omniscient. For facts about the Christian tradition of praying to Mary and the Saints check out the Hank Unplugged interview w/ Brandi Willis Schreiber ruclips.net/video/GSPaNF2Kh80/видео.html
@@BibleAnswerMan Thank you for your response, and your show of interest in the information I share in the comments. I wish you would respond verbally more often. Hank Hanegraaff, I do know that "For sure," there can be no verbal claim for the belief that Mary is being treated as though she is omniscient, neither by Roman Catholics nor Eastern Orthodox. Though asking Mary, in her glorified state in heaven, for her intercession, carries the design that Mary is omniscient, both Roman Catholics and Eastern Orthodox are taught to define the said practice with another definition; It's a huge irreversible cover-up. Hank Hanegraaff, regardless of me being able to spot this, when you are dealing exclusively with the canonized Scriptures, you have proven totally subjective to God's truth. Also, Mr. Hanegraaff, I judge you not, and in some ways, I am tickled to death that you dived into Eastern Orthodoxy. Maybe one day, I'll just show up!
@@BibleAnswerMan I fully understand that neither Roman Catholicism nor Eastern Orthodoxy are saying that Mary is omniscient. No, according to the official statement of the Eastern Orthodox belief about Mary and the other Biblical Saints, and the official statement of belief of the same, in the Roman Catholic Church, their official statements do not use the term omniscient. The option to assume the said ultimatum, in definition of practice, while avoiding the term "Omnipresence" as the word to use, exists in the "Unofficial" belief that Mary was bodily resurrected (6th century). None of the present official belief statements, neither in the Roman Catholic Church, nor the Eastern Orthodox Church, can specifically use the term "Omniscience." It is only permitted, without using the said term officially, for people, in R.C. and E.O., to believe the said ultimatum, based on the E.O. official beliefs both of Mary's perpetual virginity (649), and of Mary's higher form of intercession (8th century), along with and the unofficial belief, that we can assume that Mary was bodily resurrected (6th century). Mary as Theotokos is Biblical.
Can someone explain what it means that “God became man, so that man can become god, and we are gods by grace”. This was said at the 20 min mark in the vid. I’m coming from a Protestant background. Thanks!
"holy tradition gave us the scriptures and the right way of understanding the scriptures". God used tradition to preserve scripture, and the holy spirit gives you the right way of understanding the scriptures, Jesus explicitly stated the latter. Tradition alone in the 2nd temple period could not transmit God's word truthfully to his people. Tradition can be a helpful tool, but it can also be an idol, which it often times is in some high church settings. The purpose of litturgy is litturgy. Its importance and meaning stems from God's word. If it cannot be found in his word, it is not an essential aspect of litturgy. Ritual's purpose was always the transmission of holiness from God to his people and their land, to create sacred space for a people called to be sacred to the lord, but if you are born again, the holy spirit is in you. Everywhere you bow your knee is sacred space. The ritual which is edifying and pleasing to the lord is not merely process or even words, but renewing of the mind and of the heart, to yield action. Sacred, reverant litturgy is litturgy which relies not on human efforts or processes to commune with God, as that is a mechanism of the old covenant, intended to reveal man's absolute dependence upon God's grace. Litturgy is good when it depends only on God's grace, and is focused on acknowledging God's majesty, and pointing towards obedience for, through, and authored by Jesus Christ crucified on the cross. There is so much I love about eastern orthodoxy, but like roman catholocism and protestantism, it too seems to miss the essential meaning of God's word for the sake of defining God more completely. It is an ironic fact, given the orthodox emphasis on mystery. Even that emphasis can become excessive and misplaced.
@blakekendall6156 Nobody is saying that every single tradition is infallible and faultless. Some are just pious (or impious) opinions. There is a difference between Holy Tradition and tradition. To understand more on Scripture and Tradition consult Edith Humphrey’s work - www.equip.org/product/cri-resource-scripture-and-tradition-what-the-bible-really-says/ Also listen to the Hank Unplugged interview w/ Edith > ruclips.net/video/XQXB1DWUsPI/видео.htmlsi=4-E7fN9xkCuB_Lqg
Mother Mary as the Immaculate Conception: that was confirmed by St. Bernadette at Lourdes; Mary came and told a poor peasant girl with no theological knowledge and little biblical knowledge that she, Mary, is the 'Immaculate Conception: Bernadette mimicked these words to the Bishop without any knowledge of what this concept meant--she repeated a phrase in a questioning manner that she was given by Mary, "I am the Immaculate Conception"; Seeing what has occurred at Lourdes and the undefiled body of Bernadette today--body still on display--there is something there that cannot be denied...this was NOT just a Pope making a declaration without other causes or proof...dts/usa
Bernadette has wax because of rot, so does Pio. Some girl being influenced to give the pope a miracle (and yes the spring WAS known about by the people they just didn't think it was a big deal) isn't actually a miracle. It's a lie at best, demonic at worst.
I am wondering if the subject of Eastern Orthodox rejection of the filioque was ever touch on in this youtube. If not, it would be good to place an explanation of the rejection of the filioque in writing, for all to comprehend. Although the Eastern Fathers were aware that the procession of the Holy Spirit from the Father and the Son was taught in the West, they did not generally regard it as heretical. The Eastern Church had no problem with the filioque for hundreds of years before the split. The Filioque was inserted into the Creed as an anti-Arian addition, by the Third Council of Toledo (589), at which King Reccared I and some Arians in his Visigothic Kingdom converted to orthodox, Catholic Christianity. The Toledo XI synod (675) included the doctrine but not the term in its profession of faith. The Athanasian Creed, probably composed as early as the mid 5th-century, is a dogmatic epistle of Pope Leo I, who declared in 446 that the Holy Spirit proceeds from both Father and Son (John 14: 26/John 15: 26). Rev. Matthew Joyner made a good point, when he said that both of the following sayings could be true: The East begins with God and the eternal nature of God and looks down, and the West starts where we are and looks up. From our perspective here on earth the Holy Spirit does proceed from the Father and the Son. Jesus said that He would send the Comforter (The Spirit of truth; Holy Spirit) from the Father (John 15: 26).
@thy-ine Hank briefly comments on the filioque in www.equip.org/articles/the-church-pillar-and-ground-of-truth/. There is also helpful discussion on the filioque in A Basic Guide to Eastern Orthodox Theology by Eve Tibbs www.equip.org/product/cri-resource-a-basic-guide-to-eastern-orthodox-theology-introducing-beliefs-and-practices/ But stay tuned, as more equipping resources on the history behind the 11th century schism and beyond, which includes the matter of the filioque, is coming forth. So, stay tuned.
I simply cannot accept that Mary is the quintessential example of theosis/deification, when Scripture never hints at that in these hyperbolic terms. Maybe Paul should have written: "be imitators of Mary as she is of Christ." Where did that idea come from! Disappointed...😞
@eduardoinke2943 Mary is given such honors because she represents the perfect example of a human who cooperates with God in the epic happening of the incarnation of the Son of God. Please listen to the Hank Unplugged interview w/ Brandi Willis Schreiber > ruclips.net/video/GSPaNF2Kh80/видео.htmlsi=xMjV2oyfsqcBDMRn Also consult A Long Walk with Mary > www.equip.org/product/a-long-walk-with-mary-a-personal-search-for-the-mother-of-god/
Listened to this podcast in its entirety. Very educational and, in some ways, interesting. The challenge is with the numerous extra-biblical claims within orthodoxy, in degrees (not in substance), as with the Roman Catholicism. As one reads and studies the Bible “for all its worth” and “in the sense it is intended”, Orthodoxy seems outside, well outside, these principles. For example, in one part of the podcast, there is the mention of a discussion where the question was asked how does the elements become the body and blood of JESUS CHRIST and the retort was “explain how JESUS was truly human and truly divine and I’ll.respond to your question regarding the elements”. The answer to JESUS Divine & Human nature is simple - because that is what the Bible teaches. The Bible teaches no such thing regarding the elements. It is almost as if the split in the Church generated religious practices, neither aligned with the Bible nor biblical worship.
I would have agreed with your comments just a few years ago. The concept of Sola Scriptura is absent in the history of the Church and the writings of the Fathers. The Bible that was used by Jesus, the Apostles-and everyone else for that matter-would have been the Tanakh, or the Hebrew Bible, or the Greek version, the Septuagint. This was the case for at least two centuries, until copies of the books and letters that are now in the New Testament were copied, circulated, and canonized. There was no New Testament as we have it now available to generations of the first (and most holy) Christians. The Apostle Paul spent 2 years and 3 months teaching and establishing the presbyters and congregation at Ephesus, but we we have only the one letter-six chapters long-sent to them later that is part of Scripture, the Epistle to the Ephesians. Saint Paul exhorts in many of his letters to hold fast to the traditions taught by the Apostles. This Holy Tradition of the Apostles is what the Church was founded upon and sustained the body of Christ and kept its doctrine pure, guided by the Holy Spirit. The Scripture of the New Testament came out of the Church founded by the Apostles, not the other way around. It’s anachronistic thinking engrained into the Protestant Christian minds, opposed to what actually occurred over the course of Christian history. Calvin and Luther had a valid point of rejecting heretical (non-Apostolic) tradition of the Church of Rome that was ever changing, but it should not be at the expense of rejecting the Holy Tradition left to us by the Apostles-the very foundation of the Church-that thousands of Saints gave their lives to defend in martyrdom.
Luke 22:19 And he took bread, and when he had given thanks, he broke it and gave it to them, saying, “This is my body, which is given for you.” One of the places where the Bible tells us the bread is His body to them, “Truly, truly, I tell you, unless you eat the flesh and drink the blood of the Son of Man, you have no life in you. 54Whoever eats My flesh and drinks My blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day. 55For My flesh is real food, and My blood is real drink. John 6: 53
@@annalynn9325 Beginning with the John passage first. In context, JESUS is speaking of belief in the True Bread, JESUS CHRIST HIMSELF, Who has come down from heaven - how belief on HIM is the only way to heaven. This passage is given in the presence of and to a host of non-believers. This passage is about repentance and belief and not addressing Communion/ the Eucharist. Addressing the first reference… 'For I received from the Lord that which I also delivered to you: that the Lord Jesus on the same night in which He was betrayed took bread; and when He had given thanks, He broke it and said, “Take, eat; this is My body which is broken for you; do this in remembrance of Me.” In the same manner He also took the cup after supper, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in My blood. This do, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of Me.” For as often as you eat this bread and drink this cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death till He comes.' I Corinthians 11:23-26 NKJV In context, this Scripture indicates a memorial and not the bread and wine actually being or becoming the body and blood of CHRIST.
@@KAlphonso That’s just your interpretation. I have seen this before it’s quite prevalent, it comes right out of 16th century, not the Apostles. You do you, interpret it just as you wish, I could care less what you believe but it IS in the Bible
Can someone direct me to where in scriptures it says to pray to Mary or any of the saints?? There are some things I really admire about the orthodox faith, but that certainly isn’t one of them.
I'd direct you to that verse where it says that not everything was written down. Also, what, exactly, did Mary say when she visited her cousin Elizabeth?
@paultrueman2 ~ Good question. The evangelical Protestant can be asked, “Can someone direct me to where in Scriptures it says to have an expository sermon given each Sunday as the centerpiece of the worship service?” Not a single verse. But the practice is based upon biblical principles. The Word of God is for our instruction. God gifted some to teach. We ordain qualified men to be teachers in the Church. We give the preacher time to teach the congregation so they may not be led astray by the winds of false doctrine. Not a single verse about expository sermons being given each Sunday as the centerpiece of the worship service. Eastern Christianity observes prayers to saints because when Christians finish the course, they are never really gone, they are never lost, they are aware. They are absent in body and present with the Lord. They are the Great Cloud of Witnesses spoken about in the Epistle to the Hebrews. Like the martyrs under the altar in the Book of Revelation they can cry out to the Lord, “How long…” They cannot participate in the earthly life of the living, but they can still be aware of the affairs of the living on Earth. The living can then speak to the departed, the departed can hear them, and the departed can appeal to Christ on their behalf.
@@BibleAnswerMan OK I get the saints that have gone on are in Gods presence… but could let say anyone of them ( not being Christ) handle thousands or millions of requests at the same time?..Even in their elevated state?.. Also the other line from Jesus saying that no one goes to the Father, but through him. Sorry to bang on about this, but just trying to understand the Orthodox position.
Researching eastern orthodoxy which I respect but don't feel called to join. They don't worship mary or the saints. They simply acknowledge that they are alive though not in the body. It's a form of respect or reverence. When you go to a grave site of a loved one don't you still acknowledge there presence and give then reverence and respect by cleaning there grave and giving them flowers. That essentially is what they do.
Both the Greek translation of the Old Testament (Septuagint) and the Masoretic text may read slightly different from one another, due to how Hebrew translates to Greek, but the context of the both translations - Hebrew to English, and Hebrew to Greek and then English, has been discovered, by not a few Christian translators, to be pretty much the same message. When the ancient Church Fathers were not influenced by errors in the Jewish Apocrypha, The Biblical Apocrypha, and the New Testament Apocrypha, the message of the only canonized Scripture (The Bible's 66 Books) was saying the same context of the message. The Seven Ecumenical Councils are among the first expositions to be a statement of faith in the context of canonized Scripture. The Council of Ephesus did not disrespect Mary's position, meaning the Council of Ephesus did not expound that Mary was a perpetual virgin, nor that she was sinless, nor that she was conducting cooperative work in human redemption, but the New Testament Apocrypha (Not canonized) did influence the said belief about Mary. In rejecting Nestorianism, the Council of Ephesus officially recognized Mary as the “Mother of God,” though at the time this term was explicitly meant to refer only to Jesus’ humanity and only appropriate in Mary’s unique circumstance. Over time, this respect for Mary would mutate, within Catholicism and Eastern Orthodoxy, into belief in her perpetual virginity, sinlessness, and cooperative work in human redemption, which came from the Apocryphas above specified. Unfortunately, the legacy of the Council of Ephesus is bitterness and division; the meeting itself was said to be contentious, heated, and unfriendly. The decision to condemn Nestorianism caused an immediate split in the Eastern Church, creating several splinter groups. Aside this concern, it would be good to discuss the Eastern Orthodox belief of their rejection of the filioque. I have inserted an explanation of Eastern Orthodox rejection of the filioque in the comment below this one.
Protestantism doesn't deny mystery, it merely places supreme emphasis on scripture. Without scripture, there is a lack of unity, and confusion. Even if there are some minor differences in theology between bretheren, there is still unity because we have scripture. Look even to eastern orthodox and protestantism. They are far more similar than they are different. The primary reason Christians divide is ignorance of scripture, not knowledge of scripture.
For those considering Orthodoxy, please do yourself a favor and google the "Paraklesis" or "Small Paraklesis" or "Great Paraklesis" and consider whether it is something you can in good conscience pray and teach your children to pray. Eastern Orthodox apologists will use words like "context" and "paradigm" to try and assuage your valid concerns and quiet your conscience, but just keep in mind that the early church went to great lengths to use precise language to avoid misconceptions and idolatry. Please don't suppress your mind and conscience. This post is meant for those who are early seekers and not meant as disrespect to those who are already heavily invested beyond ability to change course. Anyway, please check out the "Paraklesis" is all I'm asking. God bless your journey!
so your referring to the parts about praying to the Mother of God..Theotokos?… that has never sit well with me, one of the major stumbling blocks for following Orthodoxy.
@@paultrueman2 It's the shocking language used combined with the alternating between addressing, adoring, and beseeching Almighty God and addressing, adoring, and beseeching the one called God-bearer... to the point where you can't tell whom is being addressed and where worship begins and ends.
@@BibleAnswerMan I asked seekers to google it and read it themselves. Anyone who needs "supplemental reading" for the Paraklesis is already so invested in Eastern Orthodoxy that they're just looking for a way to explain away valid criticism. So, my post was for those who are not too invested - who haven't totally set aside the urges of their conscience and the fundamentals and of the Faith.
Where in scripture does it say to pray for the dead. If we are still not worthy when we die what use us the blood of Christ and what he did for us. I'm the righteousness of God in Christ. I am nothing without Jesus. If this religion is true I don't see God's love and compassion or salvation thru Jesus.
I don't see a loving, compassionate, merciful God in Orthodoxy. I believe God is also a judge and that my life must change but not knowing until the last judgement if you are going to heaven or not is not comforting to me. I don't see God's love in this religion. Also the Bible says if anyone adds to it they are cursed. I've been looking into Orthodoxy and there are things there that just aren't biblical and how can what man says be above the Bible. The more I learn about the belief of Orthodoxy the more depressed I get. I'm not trying to be judgemental but truthful..
When I read about John Calvin's teachings about God, it makes me seriously depressed, and extremely thankful for Orthodoxy. A lot more compassionate than some teaching that has only been around for over 460 years.
@andrettanylund830 ~ The problem is that even in evangelical Protestant traditions that maintain the doctrine of the preservation of the elect there are still those who suffer persistently with doubts about their salvation. They are overridden by guilt perhaps over a past sin along with the accompanying trauma. Others simply don’t feel saved despite of intellectually knowing the “right” doctrine with all the “verses” for backup. The East encourages faithful participation in life in the Trinity. The goal is never the port of salvation. The port of salvation is the place of resuming the journey towards deification.
I'm not a Calvinist. My Christian friends don't fit what you say. I thought being absent from the body is present with the Lord. We have be prayed for after we die because what Jesus did isn't enough. I know after we are saved we repent every day and our lives change but just how much works do we have to do to get to God. It makes him distant and not the living, compassionate God I've always known. I have a personal relationship with him and I know he loves me. I don't have to worry if I am pleasing him enough. I don't want to be a God. He is my all in all.
Only the book of Revelation says "do not add or subtract from this book". It is not in reference to the entire Bible. Biblical inerrancy is a modern concept that was not enforced in early Christianity; very early churches often had their own canons, or sets of letters and documents before there was a set canon put in place. Protestant Christianity, in my 10 year experience, gives no more real security of salvation than any other denomination. I find a lot of division and finger pointing in Protestantism.
You'd have to ask the Protestants (and some of the liberal Catholics) that. No such thing in Orthodox Christianity. Trust me, you'd hear a big fuss being raised if that were to happen.
@onmountaintime5637 - Eve Tibbs carefully explains how women are not appointed as priest and bishops in Eastern Orthodoxy, though such never precludes women from having a place in the worship and the Liturgy. So, the Orthodox Church has ordained women to the diaconate.
Please help me understand then what she means at 1:08:20. “That there is no theological reason why woman can’t be priests.” I thought there was plenty of theological reasons or else they would be priests.
Women ARE NOT priests. And should never be ordained to any level of service, except being the wife of a man that becomes a priest. Then she does have responsibilities, but she's not ordained into a position.
And what of those Eastern Churches that are Orthodox but are in full communion with Rome? Are they not considered Orthodox anymore because they are in full communion with Rome, come fully home Hank to the Western Church. . . Orthodoxy has awesome theology in so many ways but will only be complete by coming back home. Your guest sounds like she wants to be a priest, sorry ain't in the cards, she knows a lot but I find her annoying, just saying.
Based on that logic...What of those "Western" churches that are Protestant, but have lesbian pastors? Are they not considered Protestant anymore because they have homosexual women pastors? If not, why? If Orthodoxy has "awesome theology" in so many ways, how would it be complete by adopting homosexuality?
She is not Mary, She is Our Lady, The Blessed Mother and yes The Immaculate Conception, not all Orthodox agree with this position, another thing, to use the name Mary in this way is impious and treats it as common, your guest could at least have called Her The Blessed Virgin Mary. Also, pertaining to original sin see CCC (Catechism of The Catholic Church) paragraph 404 and especially paragraph 405.
This is as far from the truth as west is far from the east. Eastern orthodoxy is anything but a Christian faith and religion. I pray that you people read more about what Eastern orthodoxy and its depatrture from Christianity.
![ARGENTINA vs. CHILE [3-0] | RESUMEN | ELIMINATORIAS SUDAMERICANAS | FECHA 7](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/De3AWmXzhuA/mqdefault.jpg)
Became Orthodox after 23 years in a Protestant sect. My entire family, my sister's family and my sister-in-law's family got baptized recently. In total, 13 people joined the church, plus two of my friends followed too. That's amazing. Our lives have changed beyond description. Glory to God 🙏🏻☦️💜🎶 A lot of people here in Canada are joining the Church ☦️
👍
I'm confused. Were you not already baptised into Jesus Christ as a protestant?
I'll never understand why people get multiple "salvations" or multiple "baptisms."
Are you not just crucifying Jesus again?
Or saying the first time wasn't good enough?
"christians" confuse me.
And I AM a Christian.
@@phloophnunya867 baptism isn't automatic salvation, no the "first time" wasn't enough because protestants have no grace
@@stuntman083
Amazing. Protestants have no grace.
I'm positive that the message of salvation is so simple that even a child understands it.
There are no differing baptisms or salvations, there's only 1.
So to keep doing it over and over is redundant and putting Jesus back on the cross over and over.
Ridiculous human actions.
Have a nice day.
I am also on my way to baptism in the local ROCOR parish. So happy to hear what the Lord does in your life.@@stuntman083
Orthodoxy is the truth! I look forward to reading this book! ☦️
Truth is a big word please don't limit truth with Orthodoxy or associating it with any church
@@solomansam1 Orthodox by definition will concern matters of the truth. Christ has established the Orthodox Church so my comment isn't intended to dim the lights of other religious traditions but spotlight the True Religion, Orthodox Christianity.
How is it truth?
Hank, God has given you a phenomenal platform. I am a fruit of your efforts. God bless you, brother.
Thank you so much Hank for doing this you are one of the main reasons I started looking into the eastern orthodox faith. I was a protestant and i listen to your show for years and you lead me to the true church God bless you.
🙏
I've been basically a divine leaning agnostic for my entire life of 55 years and recently have been feeling drawn to orthodoxy and this discussion is very comforting and confirming of my suspicion that this is the ONLY path for me to begin my repentance and finally find God
Thanks. Love to get more thoughts from you.
Orthodox Christianity is the final pill. ☦️🙌🏻
Like to believe it's more than "just" that.
Fantastic guest, please have her back again
I became an Orthodox Christian 8 years ago...my husband was Chrismated this past June...it is long saving and life giving
Really enjoyed this presentation. I've had an interest in Orthodoxy for several years, but just haven't been able to pull the trigger. I look forward, Hank, to hearing more on Orthodoxy in the future from you. God's blessings
I listened to your podcast about seven years ago. You were talking about the word Theosis. This led me on a path to read the Church fathers which led me to be chrismated into the Orthodox Church a couple of years later. Thank you for allowing God to work through you.
@djnv4702 Thanks!
Great conversation! I'm a convert to Orthodoxy of just over 10 years now and wild horses couldn't drag me away. I've found home after years of wondering.
Great information and commentary on the ancient faith
Please pray that my wife Cathy will have a change of heart. I wish to convert, but her heart is hardened. Bless you all! Daniel
@danielgaley9676 Our prayers are with you. The DM sent via FB has been passed onto Hank.
Wonderful discussion :). Thank you Mr Hanegraaff, I just finished your very substantive book Truth Matters, Life Matters More…..I wish to be able to convert to Orthodoxy…. will be in Charlotte this weekend and plan to attend St Nektarios, so Lord willing I can meet you if that is acceptable…..glory to God
Eastern Orthodox and Eastern Catholic are amazing!
God bless you brother Hank 🙏🏽
You should probably note female deacons historically were not interchangeable with male deacons. Rather they filled a specific role in the catechizing of females and some monastery roles. 1:08:48
The problem should not be the "Icon." No, the problem is "Omnipresence." Anyone who blames an icon is seriously missing the point. Icons, which cannot hear nor see, cannot hear our accusations. Our prayer directly to a saint, who has gone before us, implies that the departed saint can be assumed to have a measure of omnipresence, which is specifically an attribute belonging to God alone. Forget blaming icons.
It is a valid problem, but not an unsolvable one. For example, this comment can be seen anywhere in the world, yet I am not omnipresent.
I was surprised I didn’t see any negative or anti ortho comments (well except a few) from evangelicals in this thread. Normally in any Ortho video you get endless typical evangelicals or Protestants saying something like
“Orthodoxy and man made rituals won’t save you, we are not to worship anything but God/Christ alone. Praying to saints and Mary is idolatry. Also manmade rituals all of which were added much later and is not biblical. Trust in Christ and have a relationship with him and Read the Bible! We ought to study the Bible and trust in Christ only and not in man made rituals!
And then they post some random out of context Bible verses …. 🤦♂️
I don’t believe nematological is a real word and even if it is only a poor communicator, would use such a word. I love orthodoxy and the richness of orthodoxy but if we want to reach others with our best kept secret, we need to talk so that others can understand or it just turns them away, and makes it look like a smarter than thou group of so-called theologians that only want to impress each other. I don’t mean to say this in a mean way, I would just like orthodoxy to reach the masses. I’ve listened to you, Hank for a long time, prayed with you through your sickness, and received a blessing from a lot of this podcast.
Thanks for this. As a woman desiring to become Orthodox im overwhelmed by the male presence in The church this was so refreshing to hear a strong intelligent female . Mother Mary was an evangelist and women were deacons in the early centuries. Why did it stop?
Eastern Orthodoxy recognizes many female saints and honors them as equal to the Apostles. The veneration of the Virgin Mary, i.e., Theotokos, is a well-established tradition within Eastern Orthodoxy. On the other hand, there has never been the ordination of female priests or bishops in the history of Orthodoxy. To find out more, see the section on the ordination of women in A Basic Guide to Eastern Orthodox Theology: Introducing Beliefs and Practices by Eve Tibbs www.equip.org/product/a-basic-guide-to-eastern-orthodox-theology-introducing-beliefs-and-practices/ Also listen to Hank's interview w/ Eve Tibbs > www.equip.org/hank-unplugged-podcast-and-shorts/western-guide-to-eastern-orthodoxy/
I am a single woman who was also drawn to orthodoxy and am being carechised. I do agree it is more rare to see women convert on their own, but take heart, I pray your parish quickly becomes a family to you as mine is to me!
God doesn't allow a women to teach in the church congeration 1 Tim 2v 11 woman must learn in quietness and full submissiveness. 12I do not permit a woman to teach or to exercise authority over a man; she is to remain quiet. 13For Adam was formed first, and then Eve. 14And it was not Adam who was deceived, but the woman who was deceived and fell into transgression. 15Women, however, will be saved through childbearing, if they continue in faith, love, and holiness, with self-control.
woman must learn in quietness and full submissiveness. 12I do not permit a woman to teach or to exercise authority over a man;c she is to remain quiet. 13For Adam was formed first, and then Eve. 14And it was not Adam who was deceived, but the woman who was deceived and fell into transgression. 15Women, however, will be savedd through childbearing, if they continue in faith, love, and holiness, with self-control.
@@BibleAnswerMan thanks so much,, I will read! yes I agree and am happy about no female priests etc. My statement was around deacons, evangelists and preachers.
@@topcatcoolio8807 it is true. Please read my comment again. You misunderstood I think. I wouldn't go near a church with a female priest or bishop! Lol
Listened to 30' 33'' and so far nothing I would have been surprised to hear from my Roman Catholic priest.. especially about the communion of saints. (no doubt the teaching was badly distorted in Luther's time.. we RCs have to take blame for that). I'm surprised I don't more often hear E. Orthodox teachers speak of Aquinas' experience late in life that led him to put down his pen..
I’m just confused more than ever. I grew up Catholic, and then when I turned 18 I became an atheist first a few years. After that I became a born again Protestant and I was in a few different Protestant churches over the years. I even attended a seventh day Adventist church for a year. Recently I discovered the orthodox faith. And with all these different denominations saying they are correct, orthodox saying they are correct. I find myself more confused than ever before. Who is right? It is just a roll of the dice?
@michaelkish7794 The situation you describe is understandable. All church denominations ultimately arose out of sin. See www.equip.org/articles/what-denomination-should-i-join/ Obviously, it is illogical to say each schism is true. So, one cannot affirm both the Trinity and Modalism. One is true and the other false or both are false. But there is reason to believe the Trinity corresponds to the reality of the divine revelation given to us from God. But Christians are to strive for the unity that Jesus prayed His followers have in John 17. Please listen to these Hank Unplugged episodes: Hank Unplugged Episode #105 - The Key to Christian Unity is Humility with Francis Chan and Metropolitan Yohan | www.equip.org/unplugged/the-key-to-christian-unity-is-humility-with-francis-chan-and-metropolitan-yohan/, Hank Unplugged Episode #53 - Special Edition: The Doctrine of Unity | www.equip.org/hank-unplugged-podcast-and-shorts/doctrine-of-unity-with-hank-hanegraaff/ and Hank Unplugged: Episode #101 - Fission or Fusion? A Call for Christian Unity with Nathan Jacobs | www.equip.org/unplugged/fission-or-fusion-a-call-for-christian-unity-with-nathan-jacobs/ We strongly recommend checking out the section on Fusion in Hank Hanegraaff’s Truth Matters, Life Matters More: The Unexpected Beauty of an Authentic Christian Life | www.equip.org/product/truth-matters-life-matters-more/
Thanks! I will listen to those.
Definitely some issues with prayer to saints and infant baptism. If it wasn’t for this, I’d be in. I was baptized Greek Orthodox as a baby, but when I read the Bible, had an issue with those two doctrines.
@Eyesofmars2040 Perspective appreciated
What kind of evangelical church did you go to. I love the old testament. The things you say about evangelical is not what I have experienced.
I've been reading and studying the Orthodox Church for a couple of years. There are a couple of things I'm having trouble wrapping my head around (prayers to saints/Mary for example).
But I think the hardest thing is that there doesn't seem to be an assurance of salvation. I've seen videos of priests saying they don't know they are going to heaven when they die(!)
Can anyone shed some light on this?
@xnihilo1044 What we never find in Scriptures is a transactional faith. We just do not sign on a dotted line, we’re in, and that’s that, everything is set.
Hank stresses the importance of experiencing life with God in the deification journey. Vladimir Lossky puts it this way: “After the Fall, human history is a long shipwreck awaiting rescue: but the port of salvation is not the goal; it is the possibility for the shipwrecked to resume his journey whose sole goal is union with God.”
But even in Calvinist traditions there are those who feel as if they are non-elect and they lack any assurance of salvation. There is more to the picture than meets the eye.
The problem is a disconnection with Christ and the Church or Community of Christ. This is important for the Christian to be in fellowship within the context of a healthy well-balanced Church. You may still have moments of doubt, but it is within the body of Christ that we find encouragement, prayer, and if necessary, correction.
@@BibleAnswerMan Thank you very much for taking the time to answer my question.
From a Confessional Lutheran background, assurance of salvation is paramount. I read once that Luther said, "Salvation without assurance is no salvation at all."
It made me wonder if faithful Orthodox fear death thinking salvation could be a toss of the coin.
Therefore, my beloved, just as you have always obeyed, not only in my presence, but now even more in my absence, continue to work out your salvation with fear and trembling.
Php 2:12
Why fear and trembling if it’s a slam dunk?
“Fear not, little flock, for it is your Father’s good pleasure to give you the kingdom.”
Luke 12:32
At the same time, God desires all to be saved.
there is a good video titled something like Orthodoxy 101 - Salvation… found it helpful, but with ya on praying to anyone else other then the Lord…mmmm🤔
Didnt answer the saints and Mary part of the question@@BibleAnswerMan
Does the Orthodox Church allow its members to read the Bible for themselves, and does the church encourage this? Coming from an evangelical/protestant background we were told to read the Bible everyday. Thanks! I’m sure I’ll have many more questions.
Yes. All Orthodox Christians ought to read the Scriptures.
No Christian regardless of denominational affiliation has ever been permitted to read the Scriptures, twist its central message, and teach the perversion to others. So, the Ancient Alien interpretation of Ezekiel 1 is a space-ship launch. Such is a novel doctrinal innovation imposed upon the biblical text.
Each Christians reads the Scriptures or hears them being read, and memorize them. But we all still submit to the teachings from the Scriptures given by those whom God has gifted, taught, and called to be pastor/teachers over the flock. See www.equip.org/articles/the-imprudence-of-solo-scriptura/
Listen to Hank’s interview w/ Edith Humphrey on Scripture and Tradition ruclips.net/video/XQXB1DWUsPI/видео.html Please also consult Humphrey’s book cripture and Tradition What the Bible Really Says www.equip.org/product/cri-resource-scripture-and-tradition-what-the-bible-really-says/
Thanks so much!
All my life in Greece i hear every priest to say: not be lazy, brothers, read the Bible from the original text better every day . If something is not clear we are here to explain. Also that God's Grace opens our eyes to understand
We also hear and say, sing scripture for the entire services of orthodox and liturgy.
8:00 "one undivided church" until the 11th Century?
What about the Oriental Orthodox which I believe includes the Coptics, Assyrian, and Ethiopian Churches?
@markstuber4731 For the sects that identify as non-Chalcedonian, whether Coptic, Assyrian, or Ethiopian, they are continuing in the way of ancient schisms did over a thousand years ago. . See . www.equip.org/article/how-was-orthodoxy-established-in-the-ecumenical-councils/
Proud of its heritage, like Israel, Orthodoxy has tragically become exclusive with salvation only available inside its own sacred doors. ✔️
Reply: @dougbell9543 Expound on Orthodoxy becoming exclusive in salvation? Do you personally hold that all religions lead to God?
@@BibleAnswerMan I clearly did not state or insinuate that all religions lead to God. My concern is that all the faithful believers in the other denominations will be condemned as a result of not being members of the Orthodox Church. ✔️
Thank you for this information. I've been seeking diligently everything orthodox as I am so unfulfilled and dissatisfied in the shallowness of western 'religion'. My husband is hung up on a question about baptism that I hope you can help with. 'WHY must you be baptised in the orthodox faith when the thief on the cross clearly wasn't baptised yet Christ said he would join Him in paradise.' Also Christ told the woman at the well to go and sin no more but He didn't say 'get baptized'. Any insight into this would be greatly appreciated as I'm exhausted trying to 'win my husband over' to orthodoxy. I realize we each have our own path to God, but it'd sure be nice if we could find common ground in this most important search for truth. I would greatly appreciate any links or must read books to help in this journey.
@mindycampbell3184 Check out this article... www.equip.org/bible_answers/is-baptism-necessary-for-salvation-2/
I fully understand that neither Roman Catholicism nor Eastern Orthodoxy are saying that Mary is omniscient. No, according to the official statement of the Eastern Orthodox belief about Mary and the other Biblical Saints, and the official statement of belief of the same, in the Roman Catholic Church, their official statements do not use the term omniscient. The option to assume the said ultimatum, in definition of practice, while avoiding the term "Omnipresence" as the word to use, exists in the "Unofficial" belief that Mary was bodily resurrected (6th century). None of the present official belief statements, neither in the Roman Catholic Church, nor the Eastern Orthodox Church, can specifically use the term "Omniscience." It is only permitted, without using the said term officially, for people, in R.C. and E.O., to believe the said ultimatum, based on the E.O. official beliefs both of Mary's perpetual virginity (649), and of Mary's higher form of intercession (8th century), along with and the unofficial belief, that we can assume that Mary was bodily resurrected (6th century). Mary as Theotokos is Biblical. Here is the Eastern Orthodox assertion on Mary and The other Saints in heaven:
Mary as the Theotokos (Christ bearer) - 431.
Mary's perpetual virginity (649). NOTE: There is an option to assume here in this official belief.
Mary's intercession (Mediatrix) considered to be a higher form than the intercession of the other heavenly saints, though she does not equal nor usurp the Chief intercession of the Most High God (8th Century). NOTE: It is God the Father, through God the Son, only, who hears the prayers of the Saints on earth, and it is God the Holy Spirit who prays for the Saints here on earth, all accomplished for us, by the substitutionary atonement of God the Son. Because Mary and the Saints, while on earth, believed that the only Son of God was the Saviour, they are in heaven with Christ forever, although It is God Himself who may give Mary or other Saints in heaven the message of our activities and earthly needs, by our prayers to God only, and by the prayers of the Holy Spirit. We can ask Christ to send us the Holy Spirit, from the Father, to pray for us on earth. This is Biblically assured (No assumption, and no doubt).
Optional Non-official Doctrine:
Mary's Assumption as bodily resurrected after her death, and assumed to heaven
(6th century). There is the option to assume here in this unofficial belief.
Econ.... that makes sense. That would be why he told Moses about the snake that was raised to heal. Then Jesus said the same way the snake was raised. So will the Son of Man be.
But overall Hank I am glad your one step away from "Rome Sweet Home." You have taught me a lot, greatly appreciate you and will be praying for your health.
I admire Orthodox saints, Orthodox heartfelteness, simplicity, truthfulness. But sometimes I see that tsome Orthodoxs prefer ancient greek philosophers more than the word of God. I think verbal tradition is good, but it must stay accountable to the word of God always.
I think the Orthodox Church sees that Scripture was orally and written down within the Church, not from above or outside or independent of the church. Scripture does not claim within it that it is to be above the church but interpreted within. For scripture tells us that it is the church that is the pillar and foundation of Truth. And Christ tells us that He IS the Truth. This makes sense since Christ is the Head of the Church, the Body. So scripture is seen within the context of how it developed within the church rather than as outside and above the church. Scripture is held in the highest of esteem. If you ever go to an Orthodox liturgy you will see that the singing, chanting, teaching is saturated with the psalms, epistles, gospel, prayer.
It’s akin to the Founding Fathers who developed the US constitution. There was a lengthy process and it was finally solidified. Through their letters to each other, we know what the FF meant and we trust their interpretation of the documents bc they wrote them. Much more so than later scholars who come along and put their own worldviews upon the text. Of course, the analogy isn’t precise bc God’s word is inspired, the USC is not. But it may help to understand more how the Orthodox Church sees things vs how Protestant churches may see things through the lens of 1500-2000+ years later. One views as from within and the other looking from a different perspective sees scripture as coming from above. But if you think through how scripture actually developed, it becomes more clear that this is not the case. Unlike Islam and LDS, there wasn’t a book laid out and finished for the believers to follow. The books and letters within Christianity were developed within the Jewish and Christian age and led by the Holy Spirit. Very different phenomena.
Hello Hank!! I want to ask you question? What do you think about saint herman Russian Alaskan orthodoxy,
@FrankFriedrich-lc6ie Are you speaking of Herman of Alaska who brought Orthodoxy to Alaska? Never commented on the St. Herman per se. What inspiration have you received from the life of St. Herman?
The view against the penal substitution idea of what happened on the cross, how does this deal with Colossians 2:13-14
Eve Tibbs would say “Neither Anselm’s satisfaction model nor the Reformers’ substitutionary model of Christ’s atoning work has resonated within Eastern Orthodoxy. One simple reason for this is that both models offered solutions to what had not been the primary problems of humanity in Orthodox thought. There are certainly elements of truth in both Western models - a cosmic problem occurred, and Jesus is the solution. Yet, from an orthodox perspective, neither of these views provide a solution to an identified problem, and they are too narrowly limited in context to provide a universe remedy. (A Basic Guide to Eastern Orthodox Theology p. 118 - www.equip.org/product/cri-resource-a-basic-guide-to-eastern-orthodox-theology-introducing-beliefs-and-practices/ )
That Colossians 2:13-14 hints at penal substitution is never denied, but Colossians 2:15 depicts the defeat of the powers of darkness through the cross, so Christus Victor. Thus, there is more to the picture.
The observation from Timothy Ware is apropos…
"Where Orthodoxy sees chiefly Christ the Victor, the late medieval and post-medieval west sees chiefly Christ the Victim. While Orthodoxy interprets the Crucifixion primarily as an act of triumphant victory over the powers of evil, the west-particularly since the time of Anselm of Canterbury (?1033-1109)-has tended to rather think of the Cross in penal and juridical terms, as an act of satisfaction designated to propitiate the wrath of an angry Father.
Yet these contrast must not be pressed too far. Eastern writers, as well as western writers, have applied judicial and penal language to the Crucifixion; western writers, as well as eastern, have never ceased to think of Good Friday as a moment of victory. In the west from the 1930s onwards there has been a revival of the Patristic idea of Christus Victor, alike in theology, in spirituality, and in art; and Orthodox are naturally very happy that this should be so" (Timothy Ware, The Orthodox Church: An Introduction to Eastern Christianity, p., 223 - www.equip.org/product/the-orthodox-church-an-introduction-to-eastern-christianity/ )
The Early Church forbidden images because of the second commandment how do the Orthodox church justify using them now and immediately not trying to cause confusion I'm a Pentecostal and thinking on becoming Orthodox but this is me only stumbling block please help me understand
This article is a book review we published but it will answer your question about icons. From the article "Iconography has a theological coherence to it, a symbolic grammar, in which each part of an icon is connected to every other part, and every icon is in conversation with a host of others. Icons exist in relation to time (the liturgical calendar and church history) as well as space (church architecture and the placement of icons within the church). Just as a verbal language is composed of an alphabet, words, sentences, grammar and syntax, paragraphs, and an overarching meaning, so do all the parts and wholes of iconography fit together and live within the church’s liturgical worship, theological tradition, and biblical interpretation."
www.equip.org/articles/beautiful-union-by-joshua-ryan-butler-and-the-trouble-with-borrowing-icons/
Also this podcast with Hank called "A Historical and Biblical Defense of Icons" ruclips.net/video/updb-fkGCwE/видео.html
Also we have published another article about icons you can read. "John of Damascus and His Defense of Icons"
www.equip.org/articles/john-of-damascus-and-his-defense-of-icons/
So when babies are baptized are you saying they have the holy Spirit and are saved and sealed?
@joshlin9693 Yes. Both adults and infants receive Trinitarian water baptism by immersion, chrismation and the Lord’s Supper together. Chrismation is tied with the Seal of the Gift of the Holy Spirit.
I never felt at home in the evangelical churches I’ve attend over the years. The Orthodox Church really intrigues me. And I do want to attend one. But, there are a few things holding me back.
1. Mary, and praying to dead saints
2. Kissing objects and believing God resides in them.
3. Kissing the hand of the priest.
4. The Eucharist becomes the literal body of Christ.
These are the things holding me back. If anyone has any clarification please share. Thanks!
Here are some podcasts by Hank to help you out.
"Mary: Does the Mother of God Matter to Us? (Hank Unplugged Podcast)"
ruclips.net/video/GSPaNF2Kh80/видео.html
"Is Christ Present in the Eucharist? Francis Chan, Hank Hanegraaff & KP Yohannan (Hank Unplugged)"
ruclips.net/video/OSyTJaTufcw/видео.html
"Understanding Eastern Orthodoxy with Nathan Jacobs (Hank Unplugged Podcast)" ruclips.net/video/hm3hh0ZT6I0/видео.html
Thanks! I will check those out!
What prevents deception in this worldview? I'm hearing nothing about how to check if this is true or not?
@barryjohnson436 Good question. Hank and Eve Tibbs were mainly talking the explication of Eastern Orthodox theology. The discussion went another direction than addressing the epistemological question of what makes the proposition of Eastern Orthodox theology correspondent to reality against say other theological proposition, like Judaism, Islam, Buddhis, Hinduism, or ancient alien theory?
When it comes to the truth proposition of Eastern Orthodox theology against other truth propositions like the theological propositions of Judaism, Islam, Buddhism, Hinduism, or ancient alien theory, the theologies are all antithetical to one another. Judaism and Islam reject the Trinity, but the Trinity is essential to Eastern Orthodoxy. Eastern Orthodoxy upholds the Creator/creature distinction (God is uncreated whereas we are the created). Yet, Hinduism the distinction between the Supreme One and the person is blurred. Many Hindus will embrace pantheistic monism, or the idea that all is One and the One is Divine. For Buddhist the question of God is irrelevant. For the Eastern Orthodoxy, Christianity is life in the Trinity and the goal of life is deification or theosis. Either one of these beliefs is true to the extent that all the others are false or all of them are false and another theological proposition is true. The impossible and illogical thing is the believe they are basically the same. It is the resurrection of Jesus that distinguishes Christianity, Eastern Orthodoxy in particular, from the rest, and lends epistemic warrant to the theological truth proposition confessed and professed by the Eastern Orthodox.
Hank, I listened to you for years. I supported your ministry, I have most of your books. Now everything you taught and believed is completely different. Can't you see how devastating this is to your followers. Now all we learned from you is wrong. And how can life matter more than truth? I have been devasted by this. I respected you so much and now I'm heartbroken I don't see why you can't understand how this makes your followers feel.
Should Hank have continued to teach what he now believes to be wrong just for the sake of those listening to him?
Then he would be purposefully deceiving you!
How rare it is for someone of large influence to repent and actually change their ways. Thank God for Hank!
It isn't devastating. Rather, it's a return to Truth. You have no idea how much was thrown out by the so-called reformers.
I've listened to hank for years and have no problem with his change. I even explored eastern orthodox and like it though I don't feel called to join them. At the end of the day Christ died for are sins and they believe that. God Bless
I have researched Orthodoxy also. I even made an appointment with a priest. I was going to try it since I respect Hank but after finding out what they believe I couldn't go. Jesus isn't enough, prayers for the dead., Icons, deification,. I believe we will do works if we are truly saved. All protestants believe that. But just how much works do you have to do to receive God's mercy Also the Holy Trinity has always been very important to me
@@andrettanylund830 first of all they do believe in the trinity so whoever told you that was very wrong. also salvation is more looked at as a process. not works, it's like a tree that keeps growing. to stay nourished you have to keep drinking water and feeding the body. if you don't what happens so that's how they look at it. though i don't feel I will ever join there church I'm confident in saying that in heaven I will see Hank & many other Eastern orthodox brothers & sisters. I think I will see you also, God Bless
I apologize, but I have another question. This is my understanding of hell. That those who rejected Jesus Christ as their savior will spend eternity in hell, away from the presence of God. The other view is that God will destroy the wicked, and Satan, and his angels they will be burned up and turned into Ash. Those people will exist anymore, even in eternity.however the orthodox church seems to have a different view. That those people will still be in the presence of Christ even though they rejected him. Can you explain this in a little more detail? Or direct me to a video? I would like to find out more about this. Thank you so much.
@michaelkish7794 Watch: ruclips.net/video/Ch_Ca5TIniQ/видео.html Read: www.equip.org/articles/in-defense-of-the-churchs-traditional-doctrine-of-hell/
Glory to God ❤
🙏
Praying directly to the Mother of Jesus, who is now in heaven, is implying that Mary is omniscient. The Eastern Orthodox try to make it look like some other practice, but if the saints, who have gone before us, can hear us directly, such as what the Eastern Orthodox feel comforted in believing, then they believe that Mary is omniscient, no matter how they talk around the definition. The Bible gives absolutely no indication that Mary or the saints can hear our prayers directly. Mary and the saints are not omniscient. Even glorified in heaven, they are still finite beings with limitations. Not even the Seven Ecumenical Councils give any support to us asking a saint, who has departed, to hear us directly.
@thy-ine nobody is claiming the Virgin Mary is omniscient.
For facts about the Christian tradition of praying to Mary and the Saints check out the Hank Unplugged interview w/ Brandi Willis Schreiber ruclips.net/video/GSPaNF2Kh80/видео.html
@@BibleAnswerMan Thank you for your response, and your show of interest in the information I share in the comments. I wish you would respond verbally more often. Hank Hanegraaff, I do know that "For sure," there can be no verbal claim for the belief that Mary is being treated as though she is omniscient, neither by Roman Catholics nor Eastern Orthodox. Though asking Mary, in her glorified state in heaven, for her intercession, carries the design that Mary is omniscient, both Roman Catholics and Eastern Orthodox are taught to define the said practice with another definition; It's a huge irreversible cover-up. Hank Hanegraaff, regardless of me being able to spot this, when you are dealing exclusively with the canonized Scriptures, you have proven totally subjective to God's truth. Also, Mr. Hanegraaff, I judge you not, and in some ways, I am tickled to death that you dived into Eastern Orthodoxy. Maybe one day, I'll just show up!
@@BibleAnswerMan I fully understand that neither Roman Catholicism nor Eastern Orthodoxy are saying that Mary is omniscient. No, according to the official statement of the Eastern Orthodox belief about Mary and the other Biblical Saints, and the official statement of belief of the same, in the Roman Catholic Church, their official statements do not use the term omniscient. The option to assume the said ultimatum, in definition of practice, while avoiding the term "Omnipresence" as the word to use, exists in the "Unofficial" belief that Mary was bodily resurrected (6th century). None of the present official belief statements, neither in the Roman Catholic Church, nor the Eastern Orthodox Church, can specifically use the term "Omniscience." It is only permitted, without using the said term officially, for people, in R.C. and E.O., to believe the said ultimatum, based on the E.O. official beliefs both of Mary's perpetual virginity (649), and of Mary's higher form of intercession (8th century), along with and the unofficial belief, that we can assume that Mary was bodily resurrected (6th century). Mary as Theotokos is Biblical.
Can someone explain what it means that “God became man, so that man can become god, and we are gods by grace”. This was said at the 20 min mark in the vid. I’m coming from a Protestant background. Thanks!
@michaelkish7794 Check out this video on Theosis > ruclips.net/video/4ex6hg7_qjg/видео.html
5 seconds in, and already there's a problem.
"Truth matters, life matters more."
What? Truth matters. God's Word is truth. Period.
"Life matters more" means life in Christ. So not sure what you mean exactly.
The religious….love hearing themselves talk…
"holy tradition gave us the scriptures and the right way of understanding the scriptures".
God used tradition to preserve scripture, and the holy spirit gives you the right way of understanding the scriptures, Jesus explicitly stated the latter.
Tradition alone in the 2nd temple period could not transmit God's word truthfully to his people. Tradition can be a helpful tool, but it can also be an idol, which it often times is in some high church settings. The purpose of litturgy is litturgy. Its importance and meaning stems from God's word. If it cannot be found in his word, it is not an essential aspect of litturgy. Ritual's purpose was always the transmission of holiness from God to his people and their land, to create sacred space for a people called to be sacred to the lord, but if you are born again, the holy spirit is in you. Everywhere you bow your knee is sacred space. The ritual which is edifying and pleasing to the lord is not merely process or even words, but renewing of the mind and of the heart, to yield action. Sacred, reverant litturgy is litturgy which relies not on human efforts or processes to commune with God, as that is a mechanism of the old covenant, intended to reveal man's absolute dependence upon God's grace. Litturgy is good when it depends only on God's grace, and is focused on acknowledging God's majesty, and pointing towards obedience for, through, and authored by Jesus Christ crucified on the cross.
There is so much I love about eastern orthodoxy, but like roman catholocism and protestantism, it too seems to miss the essential meaning of God's word for the sake of defining God more completely. It is an ironic fact, given the orthodox emphasis on mystery. Even that emphasis can become excessive and misplaced.
@blakekendall6156 Nobody is saying that every single tradition is infallible and faultless. Some are just pious (or impious) opinions. There is a difference between Holy Tradition and tradition. To understand more on Scripture and Tradition consult Edith Humphrey’s work - www.equip.org/product/cri-resource-scripture-and-tradition-what-the-bible-really-says/ Also listen to the Hank Unplugged interview w/ Edith > ruclips.net/video/XQXB1DWUsPI/видео.htmlsi=4-E7fN9xkCuB_Lqg
Mother Mary as the Immaculate Conception: that was confirmed by St. Bernadette at Lourdes; Mary came and told a poor peasant girl with no theological knowledge and little biblical knowledge that she, Mary, is the 'Immaculate Conception: Bernadette mimicked these words to the Bishop without any knowledge of what this concept meant--she repeated a phrase in a questioning manner that she was given by Mary, "I am the Immaculate Conception"; Seeing what has occurred at Lourdes and the undefiled body of Bernadette today--body still on display--there is something there that cannot be denied...this was NOT just a Pope making a declaration without other causes or proof...dts/usa
Saint Gregory Palamas also believed in the Immaculate Conception
With all due respect, this is heresy. This posits that Mary is on the same level as God, which is patently not true.
@danasandlin2435 - doubt that St. Bernadette received new divine revelation on Mary and the assertion carries any authority in the Church.
Bernadette has wax because of rot, so does Pio.
Some girl being influenced to give the pope a miracle (and yes the spring WAS known about by the people they just didn't think it was a big deal) isn't actually a miracle. It's a lie at best, demonic at worst.
I am wondering if the subject of Eastern Orthodox rejection of the filioque was ever touch on in this youtube. If not, it would be good to place an explanation of the rejection of the filioque in writing, for all to comprehend.
Although the Eastern Fathers were aware that the procession of the Holy Spirit from the Father and the Son was taught in the West, they did not generally regard it as heretical. The Eastern Church had no problem with the filioque for hundreds of years before the split. The Filioque was inserted into the Creed as an anti-Arian addition, by the Third Council of Toledo (589), at which King Reccared I and some Arians in his Visigothic Kingdom converted to orthodox, Catholic Christianity. The Toledo XI synod (675) included the doctrine but not the term in its profession of faith. The Athanasian Creed, probably composed as early as the mid 5th-century, is a dogmatic epistle of Pope Leo I, who declared in 446 that the Holy Spirit proceeds from both Father and Son (John 14: 26/John 15: 26). Rev. Matthew Joyner made a good point, when he said that both of the following sayings could be true: The East begins with God and the eternal nature of God and looks down, and the West starts where we are and looks up. From our perspective here on earth the Holy Spirit does proceed from the Father and the Son. Jesus said that He would send the Comforter (The Spirit of truth; Holy Spirit) from the Father (John 15: 26).
@thy-ine Hank briefly comments on the filioque in www.equip.org/articles/the-church-pillar-and-ground-of-truth/. There is also helpful discussion on the filioque in A Basic Guide to Eastern Orthodox Theology by Eve Tibbs www.equip.org/product/cri-resource-a-basic-guide-to-eastern-orthodox-theology-introducing-beliefs-and-practices/ But stay tuned, as more equipping resources on the history behind the 11th century schism and beyond, which includes the matter of the filioque, is coming forth. So, stay tuned.
I simply cannot accept that Mary is the quintessential example of theosis/deification, when Scripture never hints at that in these hyperbolic terms. Maybe Paul should have written: "be imitators of Mary as she is of Christ."
Where did that idea come from!
Disappointed...😞
@eduardoinke2943 Mary is given such honors because she represents the perfect example of a human who cooperates with God in the epic happening of the incarnation of the Son of God. Please listen to the Hank Unplugged interview w/ Brandi Willis Schreiber > ruclips.net/video/GSPaNF2Kh80/видео.htmlsi=xMjV2oyfsqcBDMRn Also consult A Long Walk with Mary > www.equip.org/product/a-long-walk-with-mary-a-personal-search-for-the-mother-of-god/
Listened to this podcast in its entirety. Very educational and, in some ways, interesting. The challenge is with the numerous extra-biblical claims within orthodoxy, in degrees (not in substance), as with the Roman Catholicism. As one reads and studies the Bible “for all its worth” and “in the sense it is intended”, Orthodoxy seems outside, well outside, these principles. For example, in one part of the podcast, there is the mention of a discussion where the question was asked how does the elements become the body and blood of JESUS CHRIST and the retort was “explain how JESUS was truly human and truly divine and I’ll.respond to your question regarding the elements”. The answer to JESUS Divine & Human nature is simple - because that is what the Bible teaches. The Bible teaches no such thing regarding the elements. It is almost as if the split in the Church generated religious practices, neither aligned with the Bible nor biblical worship.
👍
I would have agreed with your comments just a few years ago. The concept of Sola Scriptura is absent in the history of the Church and the writings of the Fathers. The Bible that was used by Jesus, the Apostles-and everyone else for that matter-would have been the Tanakh, or the Hebrew Bible, or the Greek version, the Septuagint. This was the case for at least two centuries, until copies of the books and letters that are now in the New Testament were copied, circulated, and canonized. There was no New Testament as we have it now available to generations of the first (and most holy) Christians. The Apostle Paul spent 2 years and 3 months teaching and establishing the presbyters and congregation at Ephesus, but we we have only the one letter-six chapters long-sent to them later that is part of Scripture, the Epistle to the Ephesians. Saint Paul exhorts in many of his letters to hold fast to the traditions taught by the Apostles. This Holy Tradition of the Apostles is what the Church was founded upon and sustained the body of Christ and kept its doctrine pure, guided by the Holy Spirit. The Scripture of the New Testament came out of the Church founded by the Apostles, not the other way around. It’s anachronistic thinking engrained into the Protestant Christian minds, opposed to what actually occurred over the course of Christian history. Calvin and Luther had a valid point of rejecting heretical (non-Apostolic) tradition of the Church of Rome that was ever changing, but it should not be at the expense of rejecting the Holy Tradition left to us by the Apostles-the very foundation of the Church-that thousands of Saints gave their lives to defend in martyrdom.
Luke 22:19
And he took bread, and when he had given thanks, he broke it and gave it to them, saying, “This is my body, which is given for you.”
One of the places where the Bible tells us the bread is His body
to them, “Truly, truly, I tell you, unless you eat the flesh and drink the blood of the Son of Man, you have no life in you. 54Whoever eats My flesh and drinks My blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day. 55For My flesh is real food, and My blood is real drink. John 6: 53
@@annalynn9325 Beginning with the John passage first. In context, JESUS is speaking of belief in the True Bread, JESUS CHRIST HIMSELF, Who has come down from heaven - how belief on HIM is the only way to heaven. This passage is given in the presence of and to a host of non-believers. This passage is about repentance and belief and not addressing Communion/ the Eucharist.
Addressing the first reference…
'For I received from the Lord that which I also delivered to you: that the Lord Jesus on the same night in which He was betrayed took bread; and when He had given thanks, He broke it and said, “Take, eat; this is My body which is broken for you; do this in remembrance of Me.” In the same manner He also took the cup after supper, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in My blood. This do, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of Me.” For as often as you eat this bread and drink this cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death till He comes.'
I Corinthians 11:23-26 NKJV
In context, this Scripture indicates a memorial and not the bread and wine actually being or becoming the body and blood of CHRIST.
@@KAlphonso That’s just your interpretation. I have seen this before it’s quite prevalent, it comes right out of 16th century, not the Apostles. You do you, interpret it just as you wish, I could care less what you believe but it IS in the Bible
Can someone direct me to where in scriptures it says to pray to Mary or any of the saints?? There are some things I really admire about the orthodox faith, but that certainly isn’t one of them.
Sure, as soon as you direct us to verses in the Bible that tells us what books should be considered canonical Scriptures.
I'd direct you to that verse where it says that not everything was written down. Also, what, exactly, did Mary say when she visited her cousin Elizabeth?
@paultrueman2 ~ Good question. The evangelical Protestant can be asked, “Can someone direct me to where in Scriptures it says to have an expository sermon given each Sunday as the centerpiece of the worship service?”
Not a single verse.
But the practice is based upon biblical principles. The Word of God is for our instruction. God gifted some to teach. We ordain qualified men to be teachers in the Church. We give the preacher time to teach the congregation so they may not be led astray by the winds of false doctrine.
Not a single verse about expository sermons being given each Sunday as the centerpiece of the worship service.
Eastern Christianity observes prayers to saints because when Christians finish the course, they are never really gone, they are never lost, they are aware. They are absent in body and present with the Lord. They are the Great Cloud of Witnesses spoken about in the Epistle to the Hebrews. Like the martyrs under the altar in the Book of Revelation they can cry out to the Lord, “How long…” They cannot participate in the earthly life of the living, but they can still be aware of the affairs of the living on Earth.
The living can then speak to the departed, the departed can hear them, and the departed can appeal to Christ on their behalf.
@@BibleAnswerMan OK I get the saints that have gone on are in Gods presence… but could let say anyone of them ( not being Christ) handle thousands or millions of requests at the same time?..Even in their elevated state?.. Also the other line from Jesus saying that no one goes to the Father, but through him. Sorry to bang on about this, but just trying to understand the Orthodox position.
Researching eastern orthodoxy which I respect but don't feel called to join. They don't worship mary or the saints. They simply acknowledge that they are alive though not in the body. It's a form of respect or reverence. When you go to a grave site of a loved one don't you still acknowledge there presence and give then reverence and respect by cleaning there grave and giving them flowers. That essentially is what they do.
Both the Greek translation of the Old Testament (Septuagint) and the Masoretic text may read slightly different from one another, due to how Hebrew translates to Greek, but the context of the both translations - Hebrew to English, and Hebrew to Greek and then English, has been discovered, by not a few Christian translators, to be pretty much the same message. When the ancient Church Fathers were not influenced by errors in the Jewish Apocrypha, The Biblical Apocrypha, and the New Testament Apocrypha, the message of the only canonized Scripture (The Bible's 66 Books) was saying the same context of the message. The Seven Ecumenical Councils are among the first expositions to be a statement of faith in the context of canonized Scripture. The Council of Ephesus did not disrespect Mary's position, meaning the Council of Ephesus did not expound that Mary was a perpetual virgin, nor that she was sinless, nor that she was conducting cooperative work in human redemption, but the New Testament Apocrypha (Not canonized) did influence the said belief about Mary. In rejecting Nestorianism, the Council of Ephesus officially recognized Mary as the “Mother of God,” though at the time this term was explicitly meant to refer only to Jesus’ humanity and only appropriate in Mary’s unique circumstance. Over time, this respect for Mary would mutate, within Catholicism and Eastern Orthodoxy, into belief in her perpetual virginity, sinlessness, and cooperative work in human redemption, which came from the Apocryphas above specified. Unfortunately, the legacy of the Council of Ephesus is bitterness and division; the meeting itself was said to be contentious, heated, and unfriendly. The decision to condemn Nestorianism caused an immediate split in the Eastern Church, creating several splinter groups.
Aside this concern, it would be good to discuss the Eastern Orthodox belief of their rejection of the filioque. I have inserted an explanation of Eastern Orthodox rejection of the filioque in the comment below this one.
🙏
Is this book available in Spanish?
We do not know. Please contact Dr. Tibbs and ask her. www.fuller.edu/adjunct/eve-tibbs/
Sorry, what is the book's title?
A Basic Guide to Eastern Orthodox Theology: Introducing Beliefs and Practices by Eve Tibbs
amzn.to/42R2dBm
@@BibleAnswerMan Thank you.
They are gravin image's
Protestantism doesn't deny mystery, it merely places supreme emphasis on scripture. Without scripture, there is a lack of unity, and confusion. Even if there are some minor differences in theology between bretheren, there is still unity because we have scripture. Look even to eastern orthodox and protestantism. They are far more similar than they are different. The primary reason Christians divide is ignorance of scripture, not knowledge of scripture.
For those considering Orthodoxy, please do yourself a favor and google the "Paraklesis" or "Small Paraklesis" or "Great Paraklesis" and consider whether it is something you can in good conscience pray and teach your children to pray. Eastern Orthodox apologists will use words like "context" and "paradigm" to try and assuage your valid concerns and quiet your conscience, but just keep in mind that the early church went to great lengths to use precise language to avoid misconceptions and idolatry. Please don't suppress your mind and conscience. This post is meant for those who are early seekers and not meant as disrespect to those who are already heavily invested beyond ability to change course. Anyway, please check out the "Paraklesis" is all I'm asking. God bless your journey!
so your referring to the parts about praying to the Mother of God..Theotokos?… that has never sit well with me, one of the major stumbling blocks for following Orthodoxy.
@@paultrueman2
It's the shocking language used combined with the alternating between addressing, adoring, and beseeching Almighty God and addressing, adoring, and beseeching the one called God-bearer... to the point where you can't tell whom is being addressed and where worship begins and ends.
@ro6ti ~ Which supplemental reading for the Paraklesis are you referring? Author? Publisher? Date? Numerous resources on the Paraklesis service.
@@BibleAnswerMan
I asked seekers to google it and read it themselves. Anyone who needs "supplemental reading" for the Paraklesis is already so invested in Eastern Orthodoxy that they're just looking for a way to explain away valid criticism. So, my post was for those who are not too invested - who haven't totally set aside the urges of their conscience and the fundamentals and of the Faith.
@@paultrueman2the funny thing is all early forms of Christianity who did not consider Mary the theotokos were part of heretical movements.
✝️🇮🇱Genesis 12:3 is expressed through the deeds 💜 shown in Matthew 25:31-46🇮🇱✝️
?
Where in scripture does it say to pray for the dead. If we are still not worthy when we die what use us the blood of Christ and what he did for us. I'm the righteousness of God in Christ. I am nothing without Jesus. If this religion is true I don't see God's love and compassion or salvation thru Jesus.
2 Maccabees 12:40-46 talks about prayers for the departed.
Nice!@@olubunmiolumuyiwa
I don't see a loving, compassionate, merciful God in Orthodoxy. I believe God is also a judge and that my life must change but not knowing until the last judgement if you are going to heaven or not is not comforting to me. I don't see God's love in this religion. Also the Bible says if anyone adds to it they are cursed. I've been looking into Orthodoxy and there are things there that just aren't biblical and how can what man says be above the Bible. The more I learn about the belief of Orthodoxy the more depressed I get. I'm not trying to be judgemental but truthful..
When I read about John Calvin's teachings about God, it makes me seriously depressed, and extremely thankful for Orthodoxy. A lot more compassionate than some teaching that has only been around for over 460 years.
@andrettanylund830 ~ The problem is that even in evangelical Protestant traditions that maintain the doctrine of the preservation of the elect there are still those who suffer persistently with doubts about their salvation. They are overridden by guilt perhaps over a past sin along with the accompanying trauma. Others simply don’t feel saved despite of intellectually knowing the “right” doctrine with all the “verses” for backup.
The East encourages faithful participation in life in the Trinity. The goal is never the port of salvation. The port of salvation is the place of resuming the journey towards deification.
I'm not a Calvinist. My Christian friends don't fit what you say. I thought being absent from the body is present with the Lord. We have be prayed for after we die because what Jesus did isn't enough. I know after we are saved we repent every day and our lives change but just how much works do we have to do to get to God. It makes him distant and not the living, compassionate God I've always known. I have a personal relationship with him and I know he loves me. I don't have to worry if I am pleasing him enough. I don't want to be a God. He is my all in all.
Kalomiros "River of Fire"
Only the book of Revelation says "do not add or subtract from this book". It is not in reference to the entire Bible. Biblical inerrancy is a modern concept that was not enforced in early Christianity; very early churches often had their own canons, or sets of letters and documents before there was a set canon put in place. Protestant Christianity, in my 10 year experience, gives no more real security of salvation than any other denomination. I find a lot of division and finger pointing in Protestantism.
The Holy Spirit leads me. Not icons
To be fair, she addressed “icon” as not to mean what you are supposing. The Holy Spirit…Jesus, leads all of His children.
Okay? You're sure your version of the holy Spirit is right and not demons? Wow, you're a living saint 😂
I’m very puzzled about women being priests now
You'd have to ask the Protestants (and some of the liberal Catholics) that. No such thing in Orthodox Christianity. Trust me, you'd hear a big fuss being raised if that were to happen.
@@lolajl did you listen to the podcast? In the end it sounds like she is promoting women priests for the orthodox Church.
@onmountaintime5637 - Eve Tibbs carefully explains how women are not appointed as priest and bishops in Eastern Orthodoxy, though such never precludes women from having a place in the worship and the Liturgy. So, the Orthodox Church has ordained women to the diaconate.
Please help me understand then what she means at 1:08:20. “That there is no theological reason why woman can’t be priests.” I thought there was plenty of theological reasons or else they would be priests.
Women ARE NOT priests. And should never be ordained to any level of service, except being the wife of a man that becomes a priest. Then she does have responsibilities, but she's not ordained into a position.
And what of those Eastern Churches that are Orthodox but are in full communion with Rome? Are they not considered Orthodox anymore because they are in full communion with Rome, come fully home Hank to the Western Church. . . Orthodoxy has awesome theology in so many ways but will only be complete by coming back home. Your guest sounds like she wants to be a priest, sorry ain't in the cards, she knows a lot but I find her annoying, just saying.
Based on that logic...What of those "Western" churches that are Protestant, but have lesbian pastors? Are they not considered Protestant anymore because they have homosexual women pastors? If not, why?
If Orthodoxy has "awesome theology" in so many ways, how would it be complete by adopting homosexuality?
🎶 promo sm
She is not Mary, She is Our Lady, The Blessed Mother and yes The Immaculate Conception, not all Orthodox agree with this position, another thing, to use the name Mary in this way is impious and treats it as common, your guest could at least have called Her The Blessed Virgin Mary. Also, pertaining to original sin see CCC (Catechism of The Catholic Church) paragraph 404 and especially paragraph 405.
'Εικόν = צלם.
"His all holiness ecumenical patriarch Bartholomew . . ." Oh YAAAS, AMAHHHN. Let's all bow. What a joke.
This is as far from the truth as west is far from the east. Eastern orthodoxy is anything but a Christian faith and religion. I pray that you people read more about what Eastern orthodoxy and its depatrture from Christianity.
@drurotrkulja4736 why do you support the West in the post-schism Christianity? What of the West preserved authentic Christianity?
Reformed theology.@@BibleAnswerMan
@@drurotrkulja4736 smh
lol 😂 sorry reformed isn’t biblical nor true Christianity unfortunately.
Thank the heretic hanegraaff.