Dr.Gavin Ortlund's Case For Protestantism Refuted w/ Fr. John Whiteford
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 27 июл 2024
- #apologetics #orthodoxy #TruthUnites #christianity
On this episode of The Transfigured Life we debunk Dr.Gavin Ortlund's attempts to make a case for Protestant Christianity and show how it has no roots in ancient Christianity and true catholicity.
0:00 - Intro
3:15 - Quick reactions to Gavin's video
4:50 - Criticisms of protestant catholicity
27:12 - Examining protestant's faulty history/accretions
34:15 - Protestant abuse of tradition and authority
57:25 - Closing remarks
For more of Fr.Whiteford's follow his podcast on Ancient Faith Radio: ⬇️
www.ancientfaith.com/podcasts...
Fr.Whiteford's parish website:
saintjonah.org/
Blog:fatherjohn.blogspot.com/
I'm not Orthodox, but 5 seconds into his video and Ortlund refutes his own position. "It traces its origin to the 16th century." The origin of the apostolic churches is Christ.
I live in a house that was built in 1900, but we’ve done a lot of work since we moved in - I might say the renovations trace their origin to the 21st century, even though the house itself is still much older. To describe the reformation as “tracing origins” to the 16th century doesn’t mean the faith as a whole was invented then.
@@Cornelius135 Horrible analogy. That house was never abandoned or sold in the first place. We were still in it when you "moved in and did renovations"
@@Cornelius135 The "House" of the Church does not deteriorate or become dilapidated and does not require any renovations. God by the Holy Spirit has promised the opposite, in fact.
@@Cornelius135 A proper analogy would be, this house is 2000 years old and the same family from back 2000 years ago then still occupies it generation after generation. Your analogy doesn't make sense because it's saying the house was lost at some point and now you're building a new house in the 21st century that attempts to rebuild what they think it look like, when the actual house is there and you can go visit it
I’ve been a protestant all my life till a couple years ago. So much I’ve learned I’m definitely converting to orthodoxy. I was raised Pentecostal. I want the true church. I’m 71. God bless you Thank you so much for this video.
Glory to God! So happy to hear this! We wish you well on your journey home! ☦
Welcome home!
Welcome Home!!
how does someone get the "true church."
@@johnalexis8284 I suggest study history. Start with Christ, then look where the apostle went and what they taught. You will have to be orthodox if you follow that path. Example: look up ANY Antiochan church and see if you can find their lineage. Should lead back all the way to Peter (and Paul) in Antioch. (Note that Peter established his first church in Antioch-not Rome)
Fr. John is a treasure for American Orthodoxy.
Facts!! 🎯🎯
Amen!
Yes!
Fr. John, outstanding teaching and explanation!
Absolutely.
It’s really hard hearing Ortlund say protestantism has a stronger tie to history.
Haha it's like how do you convince yourself this is true?! 😅
@@EmberBright2077 Too bad for you , saying "Protestantism has a stronger tie to history" isn't the truth. The Christian church didn't die after the apostles died and just turn up again after the reformation.
@@EmberBright2077
The issue is that the Church has to have Apostolic Succession.
Baptists don't believe in Sacerdotalism, which is an Unbiblical Standard.
Do you have a time stamp for that? I missed this quote.
@@shobudski6776 This right here.....If this is what you think he meant, you didn't listen or understand him.
Just finished watching this latest video from “The Transfigured Life” channel. Great content and as always I am learning new things. Thank you Luther for bringing this content, and thank you Father Jonathan Ivanhoff & Father John Whiteford for your time.
There is one thing in particular that Fr John Whiteford said that really resonated with me. I myself have also experienced a “total world view shift” when I came to Orthodoxy. I suspect many new converts to Orthodoxy do too, especially when coming from Protestantism.
The shift is so profound that i have found the many questions & doubts, both big & small settled once coming to Orthodoxy.
As was mentioned by Luther in the video at the end, truly “…the faith was once for all delivered to the saints.” Jude 1:3 There is no need to reinvent anything, as it was given in it’s completeness already. Glory to God! ❤️☦️
Yes so true brother!! The worldview shift is real! 🎯 Thanks again for your kind words! ☦️
I've experienced that shift as well. Its a very different view of things.
I go to a Baptist church and have been exploring orthodoxy. This is was very insightful.
Look up two books, Rock and Sand. And Orthodoxy vs. Heterodoxy
@@hannahbaker3080 💯💯
To your point on Jewish similarities in Orthodox Christian worship, you're absolutely correct. For years, I rejected Christianity because the protestant apologists were very lacking with inconsistent or poor answers on proving without a doubt Christianity was the continuity of temple Judaism. It wasnt until I looked into Orthodox Christianity when I actually saw it, and saw good apologetics. The services are what won me over. Some similarites were:
-The Chanters, in the synogouge we had Cantors.
-Veneration of the Gospel, we did this with the Torah.
-Singing the Espistles and Gospel we did this too.
-Vespers which are similar to Erev shabbat services.
Also Jews absolutely do say prayers for the dead its called Kaddish its in Aramaic and is sung at the end of every erev Shabbat service.
Very good discussion. I was a Protestant for many years and I came to the same conclusions.
Amen! Once you see the truth of Christianity it's hard to unsee it! ☦️
@@TheTransfiguredLifeso true
Nice talk, glad I found this channel instead of more Gavin Ortlund, who keeps appearing in my feed despite my best efforts.
As a reluctant protestant myself there is definitely a move of God happening that is drawing protestants back to their roots whether it be RC or EO. The more I learn history of the faith the more I'm realising the pitfalls and problems with my own protestant tradition. I hope one day we see a reunification.
3:57 thank you for making this point. I am now a catechumen, but I come from an old Anabaptist (Hutterite) family. Even before making the journey into Orthodoxy, I have had fond opinions of them. While the RC were imprisoning us or burning us at the stake and the Lutherans were drowning us; the Orthodox in Russian just left us alone and let us live in peace. So when I did my reading of the Church Fathers and the history of theology, and realizing that a significant amount of baptist and presbyterian doctrine I was raised on was incorrect, the decision between RC and the Orthodox was easy for me.
Can you point to any reliable source of Catholic persecution of baptists?
@@ghostapostle7225 Anabaptists, not baptists. This isn't some Trail of Blood theory. No one denies that Jakob Hutter was tortured and burned alive under King Ferdinand at the Golden Roof. For a source, may I suggest looking up the Ubrige Brocken Memorial in the Huttererpark, at Innsbruck Austria. It is a monument for the Hutterite martyrs. I could also suggest books like the Martyrs Mirror, the Hutterite Chronicles, encyclopedia entries ect. But standing stones sometimes carry more weight.
Cite your source for this, "While the RC were imprisoning us or burning us at the stake" and the Russians left you alone because they didn't go out and evangelize the world. They stayed home unlike the catholic church that crossed the sea into the unknown to convert the Americas and so on. Look at the Russians today, Kirill says Bartholomew is a schismatic.
The Death of Scripture and the Rise of Biblical Studies
By Michael C. Legaspi
This one?
That's it.
Fr. Jonathan and Luther are two of my favourite Orthodox youtubers even though I've converted to the 'dark side' (Catholicism), but E.O is a precious tradition and protestants would shamefully want to eradicate it if given a chance (i.e. want all become some post-modern protestant denomination of which there are several thousand denominations - that no one knows which is the one true denomination)
Haha the "dark side" that's funny! Also, thanks for your kind words we are truly honored ☦️
And to your point this is one of the reasons why protestants are converting in MASS!
These new converts value truth and want something ancient and rock solid. They are tired of a faith that's constantly "reforming" and subject to change with the next culture war!
@@EmberBright2077 Well there is some good points of attestation to it.
Historical points like Josephus Flavius mentioning the martyrdom of James who knew the Lord. The talmud also reports the killing of Christ which is evidence he wasn't an imaginary person.
The prophetical aspect of it as well, how the hope of resurrection in Isaiah and Daniel and the coming of Elijah who was taken up by God point to this.
Heck even other religions have also a story of a coming anointed one (and definitely not a notion of some secular humanistic ideal or political figure head etc) who would save humanity as if it has been placed on our hearts by God himself.
Then there is miracles themselves of which are similar to the miracles that Jesus himself performed.
These aspects IMO give Christianity a great deal of weight behind it compared to any other world view.
You might appreciate another conversation Fr John Whiteford had back in 2014 with the kate greats Fr Matthew Baker and Kevin Allen, both of blessed memory, on Ancient Faith Radio, entitled The Pope and the Patriarch, about the dialogue between Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox. It’s so good
@@eyesee9715
I'll have to check it out. Does it mention how many of the church fathers wrote that Peter was the chief of the apostles? Or how St Cyprian actually stated that Rome was the throne of Peter (yes every bishop is a type of Peter, but there is only one throne of peter). Or how Tertullian stated that the Pope was the bishop of bishops and Pontifex maximus?
So good Fathers and Luther. I too became fed up with Protestants' ignorance of Church history, and it led me to Orthodoxy.
I met Fr. Jonathan at my parish not too long ago. It's great to see him popping up more online. It's also assuring to see more rebuttals addressing Gavin Ortlund's content. I won't call him intellectually dishonest because I don't know his heart, but the way he distorts the truth and presents information is disappointing and misleading. He seems to be bent on dragging people not yet properly catechized in the faith out of the Church.
I don't really like Dr. Ortlund but I don't think that's his intention, exactly. It's more like, he's running damage control trying to discourage disillusioned evangelicals from looking outside the box of Protestantism.
Gavin like all protestants operates on decontextualized quote mines just like the sects they spawned and don't consider Christiaan, JWs and Mormons
I have exactly the same feelings about Gavin and couldn’t articulate it better! Every time I see him, a dark cloud comes in my heart feeling sad for all those people that are being held back from truly knowing Christianity, due to his misleading teachings!😢 I really pray for Gavin and all his followers for Lord to take the veil of understanding away!🙏🏻
I know people say, Mr. Orland is charitable, but I just don’t hear that. I don’t think father Johnathan is trying to be charitable either to be honest with you, but he’s not faking it either. What amazes me is what Dr. Orland will say in his videos that is so easily disproven.
“They believe that God is up there..”
they’re living in a two story world. Orthodoxy believes that He is “everywhere present and fills all things”
When I began to live that out, my eyes, my eyes were opened.
God bless you
Amen! Thanks my sister! ☦
Yes and check out Fr Stephen Freeman’s book on this very subject, a two story universe. It is very good!
Protestantism is gnosticism masquerading as Christianity.
Such an interesting strawman. It reminds me of the atheist pejorative 'sky daddy'. Pity it's no more accurate of Protestant theology than the atheist who makes mockery of God. 😐
@@zacdredge3859 you’re wrong. It’s not a straw man. You may not believe my statement but the point remains. There are 30,000 denominations of Protestantism in America today. Statistically, I’m at least right in some capacity.
Thank you for this rebuttal. I’m a catholic, but it’s great to see our Orthodox brothers defending the fundamentals of Marian veneration, miracles and tradition. I’ve found Gavin to be likeable but highly disingenuous. Appreciate you guys calling it out.
Thanks! ☦️
He loves making videos against Roman Catholicism. I'm sure Trent Horn and other apologists have some good responses coming.
I’m a Catholic as well, and I greatly enjoyed this video!!
Same here. Always loved our EO brothers and sisters.
We are not brothers until you come to the Orthodox faith. Come to the truth before its too late. May the Lord guide you.
@Skd92g ouch. Well I can't say I'm surprised, i was just confirmed in the catholic church this easter so i doubt youll make a believer out of me.... still i think a lot of you guys. Wish the sentiment were returned but i can live with if not. Curious whats your take on the potential schism over the Russia Ukraine war? Do you think if you guys had someone in charge it could prevent something like that happening over mere cultural differences? Not even a doctrinal issue but they're splitting? Perhaps I'm misinformed but it seems like the Greeks do what they want, the Russians fo what they want, and everybody puts on a face like none of it happening. Anyway... I'll always consider you a brother. Peace of the lord be with ya!
A few comments: Gavin does not believe that the church was lost for centuries until the reformation. I understand this was a 5 minute video, but it's better to respond to the claims of the video itself and not to ideas outside of it. Depending on who is being responded to, the arguments may or may not hold any water. This overall was an alright video, reasonable objections, but some are still unanswered. How can all traditional branches of Christianity claim to be the "one true church" (coptics, assyrians, orthodox, and catholics)
Thanks for your fair comment. As for Gavin, if he doesn't believe some sort of apostasy occurred before the reformation then he will have a harder time proving the absence of his theology for centuries.
Appreciate you admitting to the reasonable objections. What other objections were left unanswered? To your last comment about the "One true church". Anyone can make a claim to being the one true church but what matters is does that "branch" have the historical & theological continuity throughout the centuries. Which I believe the strongest case that can be made is for the Orthodox Church.
@TheTransfiguredLife thank you for responding! He does indeed have a harder time proving his theology with Baptist theology seemingly being especially recent. I suppose the unanswered part is, how is Tradition more reliable than Scripture when the apostolic churches are in schism? Protestants are often critiqued for splitting over different interpretations of scripture, but the apostolic churches, who have the same source of authority, scripture+Tradition, yet come to different conclusions as Protestants too? I hope this makes sense
@@child_of_weakness7600 Great question. Tradition is not a rival to the scriptures. From the Orthodox vantage point we see scripture as a part of Holy Tradition. The oral teachings of the Apostles are referred to in holy scripture.
As for other groups claiming to be the one true church with scripture + tradition. One must remember anyone can make a claim. I would argue that the Orthodox Church has a more consistent biblical & historical foundation. We could make a case that the Catholic Church has added Dogma's throughout the centuries like the immaculate conception, papal dogma's & etc etc. As for the Oriental Orthodox and other groups like AcoE, I would say looking at the first millennium of Church history and seeing which Church has the most historical continuity will help with such an investigation.
My Priest put the perspective of the Christian's persecution before Constantine legalized the religion. He said, it must have been a sight to see all these men at the first Ecumenical Council. Most were persecuted with limbs, eyes, and other parts of their bodies removed. It was only 12 years between the legalization and Nicaea I.
Love Fr. John's commentary around the 19:00 mark. This is something I thought about a lot, how outside of the Scripture most conservative protestants approach anything miraculous with the exact same skepticism as a liberal academic would to the miracles in the Bible; the difference is really just a matter of where one arbitrarily draws the line. I've often tried to articulate this point, but Fr. John really did so effectively and clearly. I'm taking notes.
No - they just make a difference between "the power of an Apostle" and God doing his will.
Nice discussion, thank you! I'm Catholic myself, but it's always good to see Eastern Christians respond to Protestant apologists. Btw, Fr. Jonathan should do a video tour of the library I see behind him. I'll bet there are some interesting titles there. I think I can see a couple of Jaroslav Pelikan's books and the series by Schaff of the Fathers. 😄
Hahaha the Schaff series. Good eye! 😂😂
@@TheTransfiguredLife I couldn't help it because lately I've bought a few used copies I found. Fr. Jonathan must be like me in preferring real books to digital. 😄
@@johnmb69 Indeed I am!
This one is a keeper. Thanks!
Thanks for tuning in brother! ☦️💥
Luther, Fr. John Whitford would be just the man to refute Gavin’s latest podcast regarding Icons. I hope you will have him on to do so.
That's an excellent idea! I was actually thinking the same thing! I'll run it by Fr.Ivanhoff
@@TheTransfiguredLife I think Fr Whiteford is about as good as it gets in terms of apologetics. Very knowledgeable and tells it like it is in a firm but unemotional manner.
Happy new subscriber here! Thank you, Luther, for an outstanding channel. ❤️☦️
Fr.Jonathan and I really appreciate all the kind words we have received from you all. Thank you! ☦️
It is quite apparent that Dr. O uses the "Proof Text" strategies of his Protestant (He was a Presbyterian minister before he became a Baptist) selecting only what he thinks supports himself. In older videos he speaks of his admiration of Huss, and how horrible the RCC was to murder him, as well as the poor Albigensians, "good Christians" in his mind who the Catholics were ruthless against. What he fails to tell his audience is that both groups would mount an offensive attack on Catholic Churches slaughtering or banishing the congregation and priests who did not accept their new teachings. Ortland claims to believe in the Real Presence of our Lord in the Bread and Wine in his communion, without need for Apostolic Succession, but his love and support of Huss omits that Huss believed the teachings of Wycliff who taught the Bread and Wine does not become Jesus, but Jesus becomes bread to feed us. No only contrary to Orthodox and Catholic Teaching but his own peculiar teachings.
Dr. O stops his studies of Orthodoxy and the RCC when he finds a "Proof Text" that seems to justify his position, even if the rest of the writings reject his interpretation of the one point he thinks he has support for, let alone the rest of the Fathers.
It is just one example of his poor research, he like many an uninformed Protestant decries the RCC for persecuting the Albigensians, who he calls Proto-Protestant Christians, who resisted Rome. The reality is like the Hussites, they forcibly took over churches banishing priests and any congregants who did not accept their teachings. They did the same with any civil leader they encountered who resisted their new religion. In reality theirs was not a new Religion, and despite Dr. O's claims that they were Christians, since most Protestant histories list them as such, they were dualists, who taught a Gnostic religious belief that there were two gods, the OT God who was cruel and a NT God. The OT God had created matter which was evil, and the NT was a spiritual God, with no body. They also believed that only the Perfecti, those of their followers who at the end of their lives gave up marriage and food, starving themselves to death would go to heaven. The Dominican order was founded by Benedict Guzman to combat two things, corruption within the Clergy and the errors of these Gnostics, they were received by the Aligensians with beatings and torture, those friars who survived were then sent to warn others who wanted to restore orthodoxy that they would face the same fate. @@EmberBright2077
St Ignatius put the nail in the coffin for protestantism for me too.
How? Did he venerate icons? Find the evidence for that. St. Ignatius believed what protestants believe about Mary. That she bore the savior while still being a virgin. nothing more, nothing less. A great miracle yes. But he did not pray to her. Find the evidence
@@Ehhhhhsureeeedo you go to a biology professor to learn about philosophy? A mechanical engineer to learn about psychology? No, of course not. An expert in one subject does not make them an authority on all subjects. Similarly, you shouldn't read a chemistry book to learn about poetry. Context and subject matter are important. Why, then, would you expect somebody who writes letters to churches and people he probably personally knew to include a treatise on every element of theology. It's ridiculous.
So what does St Ignatius write about and why is he writing about it? Only after you answer those 2 questions, then you can have an intelligent discussion on how that relates to higher orders of conversation, such as a comparative analysis of two theological frameworks and their compatibility with the subject matter of his letters.
I'm sorry, but I'm not interested in gotcha questions and unreasonable demands for evidence. It's like an atheist asking for material proof that God exists, a totally nonsensical and unreasonable demand. Similarly, asking for evidence of a historical figure doing some specific thing, ie writing about a specific subject, despite it not being something you'd except them to have done, because the only writings of theirs we have are personal letters from a specific time in their life.
Exactly, you guys go to masters of manipulation and false narratives instead of the actual sources. What EO is today has evolved and transformed into mysticism and idol worship.@@campomambo
@@campomambo It's not unreasonable. He did get you. Mary is only mentioned literally 5 times in entire 2nd century apostolic fathers writings and ONLY as the mother of Jesus and once as the virgin who birthed Jesus. That is it. in 100 YEARS she is just mentioned in passing. The reason you are uninterested in "gotcha questions" is because you have nothing and no argument.
@@bairfreedoma gotcha question is one that sounds like it instantly proves somebody’s argument false, but is in fact actually based on false assumptions/presumptions. So let me prove why his question was based on faulty assumptions.
Let’s say Protestantism is c. The premises that it needs to be true are a and b. Orthodoxy is z, and its premises are x and y. Let’s say that if a is true then x is false and vice versa. My statement was that a certain individual proves that c is false. The other commenter came along and replied by saying I’m wrong because said person never talked about y. Now, first of all I never was claiming that this person talked about x or y. By necessity in order to refute c, one must first refute either a or b. So either this person must have refuted a or b. Why am I saying the gotcha was about y and not x? Simple, because not all Protestants reject veneration of the saints or deny the ever virginity of Mary. Anglicans exist after all. Martin Luther and other reformers also strongly condemned people who denied Mary’s ever virginity as heretics.
So not only did he bringing up an irrelevant topic like veneration of the saints as if silence on that subject means anything, it has nothing to do with my comment about St Ignatius refuting Protestantism. Just because your more recent branch of Protestantism rejects these things doesn’t mean it applies to all Protestants.
I love the anachronistic graphic about the churches as "institutions". Protestants, please, The Orthodox Church, is not an institution with sacraments, but rather a sacrament with institutions. The Church is the primary vehicle of God's grace into creation.
Father John wielding the sword of Truth! Glory to thee our God, glory to thee! ☦️🗡️☦️
Sarcastically bashing the perspective of a 5 minute video for 1 hour without actually speaking to the man in the process to gain more insight and context isn’t what I would call wielding the sword 🗡️ of truth. It looked more like a prideful attack on the lowly protestant who isn’t there to speak for himself. Sad that people who profess to be followers of Christ would create such a lazy and sarcastic critique on such an important topic. What was even the intention of this video?
Objective Truth hurts sometimes. God bless you ☦️
Protestantism refuted in less than 1 Hour.
Some great insights and solid arguments for the Holy Church. Subscribed.
Awesome talk. Good job, Luther. Thanks to Father John and Father Jonathan. 👍👍
Edit: Subscribed!!
Thank you! ☦️
St Ignatius was the last domino to fall before i realized i had to go to the apostolic church. Granted, I crossed the Tiber first, but soon enough I sailed the Adriatic.
You don’t know what you don’t know. I almost became Roman Catholic because I had never heard of Orthodoxy.
Dr. Ortlund is woefully mistaken in his criticism of Orthodoxy so severely, I question his honesty. Two videos he was completely unfair and possible dishonest. One was when he talked about Melanchthon’s correspondence with Constantinople where he criticized the manner the Patriarch referred to Melanchthon as being condescending. It was not, the patriarch gave him the same respect he would have given a respected member of faith. The second was when he claimed that the 7th ecumenical council instituted the veneration of Icons contrary to all Church history. Of course that is wrong and refuted not only by Orthodox tradition but also by secular art historians.
You’re going to question a man’s honesty because he felt there was a condescending tone in a letter and you don’t read it that way? That’s totally subjective. And Ortlund has never denied that Christian art was produced in the first few centuries. The question is if that art was venerated -which is debatable.
@@hettinga359 Yes I am, especially when doing so he his claiming Malanchthon is a “better Christian” and more “Catholic” than the Patriarch he was corresponding with because of it. The use of Icons prior to Nicaea II in 787 is not debatable what so ever and Ortlund states that they were not just not venerated, he claims that veneration was strictly prohibited prior to 787, “a complete 180”. His mistakes are striking and in my opinion done purposefully to mislead people to pervert Orthodox teachings and history for the benefit of Lutheranism. The True History of The Church is messy enough to provide ample ammunition to prove the humanity of it without rewriting it. Isn’t that in fact Luther’s entire point, the Church isn’t infallible, Except of course in creating the Bible. The disagreement between the Church fathers are vivid. St. John Chrysostom didn’t even agree with himself over the course of his ministry as he did a 180 on marriage vs asceticism. Does that mean that Chrysostom’s contributions to Christianity were invalid or in any way diminished of course not. Likewise when Patriarch Jeremias II of Constantinople referred to Malanchthon as his son or his child in Christ it wasn’t condescending because it’s how he would refer to his own Priests and Bishops and in fact all his faithfull as they still do today. It was in fact one hundred percent opposite of how Ortlund depicts it. Likewise when expressed after multiple attempts by Malanchthon to not want to reform Orthodoxy and suggested that they continue their correspondence only in Christian friendship as some sort of anti Christian insult is similarly stupid. Plenty of controversy surrounds Jeremias without stretching truth all. Ortlund, however takes Jeremias’ refusal to reform Orthodoxy, a power Jeremias had no more than he had to reverse gravity by the way, as anti Christian and anti Catholic is foolish. Ortlund, excuse me, Dr. Ortlund must know all of this, so why promote falsehoods? There are only two answers, ignorance or deception. Ignorance in his case could only be the result of intellectual laziness which ai would consider unlikely leaving a case, strong case, for deception.
@@hettinga359 Yes, Ortlund is quite intellectually dishonest and deceptive. He portrays himself as an ecumenical nice guy, but when challenged, that visage quickly fades away. I also responded to this same video Fr. Jonathan, Fr. John, and Justin responded to here, and he came out swinging.
You know there were several iconoclastic movements prior to that which made veneration of images absolutely forbidden…until it was reversed by the next regime. I watched Ortlund’s video about the correspondence and he characterized the interaction as mostly positive. Seems like you’re overly sensitive to even minor criticisms of anyone on the orthodox side. As Protestants we see it as a sad missed opportunity when the church of the east essentially says “you’re welcome to learn from us but we have nothing to learn from you and will not consider your doctrinal arguments.” You may see that as good and proper because you see all churches outside of orthodoxy as false and damned but it’s disappointing for us because we do hold some important things in common.
@@calebmullins8827 proof? Please show me where he dropped the nice guy persona
Exhilarating discussion. Please please host a cordial debate between Fr. Whiteford and Dr. Ortlund. Thanks.
A couple of questions I always ask is in regards to continuity with the Old Testament. Who was right between the Essenes, the Sauducees, Pharisees, the Samaritans, and others? According to Jesus, it wasn’t them all collectively being true and being valid, it was one group. So why is it that God suddenly, after demanding specific worship from a specific group of people, now says that any old thing will do? At that rate, who are we to say Arians, Gnostics, Nestorians, or even Jews and Muslims are wrong at that rate? It’s funny, Protestants like Ortlund have more in common with perennialists than historic Christianity.
I'm Catholic. I like EO apologetics much better than RC apologetics!
When I was still Baptist I remember reading our particular churches history. It was insanely conservative. Even liturgically. They had a chalice for the wine, only the minister could hand out the Lord's supper, and more like that. No instruments allowed, it was basically Episcopal, and they would do public confession.
They were also sabbatarians for a long time and dabbled heavily in the KKK. The bleaker part of its history.
But the Church of today, though still retaining conservative morals, was no longer what it had been even 50 years prior.
And with all the weird scandals going on there from time to time it's more than probable this will be thrown into question. It's only a matter of time before it also becomes either highly liberal or ceases to exist. I give it 20 years.
A credible case for a movement which started 1500 years after Christ ascended cannot be made.
Facts 💯
Nor one that started 15 min after.
Really solid case Fr. John presented here. Thanks for having him on!
You're welcome! Love the channel! ☦️
I brought Independent fundamental Baptist (King Jimmie only) turned charismatic after 18 so yeah about to start Catechument. Lord have mercy. I heard a voice say "check out the Orthodox" So it beginned.
I’m very happy to subscribe to your channel! Thank you for this excellent discussion. 🙏🏻☦️
You're most welcome! ☦️❤️
I was raised in a non denominational community Protestant Church but hadn't attended in awhile.
When I attempted to return to the Church I found the Protestantism I grew up in doesn't seem to exist anymore.
Our Church was liturgical, and conservative. In fact it was very much like the Orthodox Church I attend now. Without the Icons and Mariology of course.
The theological drift of Protestantism drove me to search for stability in beliefs and service leading me to Orthodoxy.
I'm still not all in on some of the Orthodox traditions but in all important matters of Theology ie the Nicean Creed. I am in complete agreement.
Hi James. As a conservative protestant, not trying to pick an argument here, but I don’t think in EO you get to choose what is and isn’t an “important matter of theology.” If you don’t affirm the canons and dogmas, you’re anathema.
(I’m with you in rejecting icons and Mariology, but in an EO context, I don’t think you’re allowed to pick and choose. Though our EO friends may correct me here.)
@@tjkhan4541 There's a bit of variation between different Priests and Bishops. My Priest knows I don't venerate Icons and don't by into all the Mariology and he's fine with that. Most Mariology isn't Dogmatic in Orthodoxy like in Roman Catholicism. Just the Virgin birth of course and the title Theotokos, the God Bearer, because it defines Jesus as divine from birth. The title was added to fight the heresy that Jesus was born a man then became a God. All other Mariology is non Dogmatic because it doesn't relate directly to Christ and salvation.
@@jameshill8498 I see, thank you for explaining that
@@jameshill8498as someone who is looking into EO this puts me at ease. I hope I find an EO church like that. 🙏🏼
The faith once delivered to the saints, but given a theological 'polishing' in the 16th century ;)
Wrong again. The Followers of Jesus were all in agreement up till the 4th Century . its the eastern and catholic Church that polished its self .
@@dallasbrat81
When did they start disagreeing and about what?
@@ThruTheUnknown when politics entered the picture and power struggle
A very enlightening and interesting talk. Thank you!
Thanks Marianne! :)
Roman Catholic here. I enjoyed this. Thank you! And I love my EO brothers.
Thanks my friend. Glory to God! ☦️
Orthodoxy is the one and true church. The one and only church God created and promised to preserve until the end of times. Glory to God ❤
Amen! ☦️
At first I really appreciated Ortlund’s content but as I’ve learned more and contemplated his arguments, I’ve found them consistently incoherent, arbitrary, and frankly, I have a hard time seeing how he’s not actively deceitful. Saying the patristics didn’t have a high view of the Theotokos is one of the most ridiculous things I’ve heard. Once you see how arbitrary his basis is for defining “Christianity” it becomes hard to not see through Protestantism altogether. Originally he was one of the main voices keeping me Protestant but over time, he has become an active contributor to me leaving Protestantism. His perspective is internally incoherent and ahistorical. I have come to believe that he isn’t actually approaching the topics with a sober mind and following the evidence where it leads but is engaging it with his presuppositions and emotional attachments blinding him from clear patristic (and biblical!) teaching.
I read the Philip Schaff early church fathers online on CCEL fathers website. Where can I access the missing writings and also writings of post-schism Orthodox saints/fathers such as Gregory Palamas
Luther! You're going to need to take a Christian name 🙂
His Orthodox name is Justin! 😊
Is my name to protestant for you lol?
@@TechnologicZbHaha yes! Justin. Amen! ☦️
@@TheTransfiguredLife I am sorry to say it is. Glory to God you found a home in Orthodoxy. Pardon my forwardness. You are doing great work here.
@@daniel8728 All good brother! And Thank you! ☦️
Ortland tries hard I’ll give him that
Very good video. I was raised protestant and Baptist and yeah we weren't open-minded at all. We thought most Roman Catholics and Orthodox were not saved, although some might be. We thought all the liturgical stuff distracts you from God so protestants have the highest percentage of saved people. We didn't believe in any umbrella of a catholic church that covers all Christians. We did believe in miracles and weren't empiricist all the time. We thought actual miracles with no natural explanation were rare but very possible in our daily lives.
"The whole Church" (East and West) has been divided for a very long time on the Papacy, Purgatory, Filioque, etc. Unless you think only your Church is correct, which is a source of the dis-unity that each RCC and EO helps perpetuate. The Protestant positions allows you to hold onto essential Christian doctrine that we share with the RCC and EO without having to anathametize other Christians who believe differently on some beliefs.
1) There is no "Protestantism" as though it were a singular Christian tradition. There are at least seven major Protestant traditional categories, all massively disagreeing with each other.
2) The original Reformers couldn't even agree on the substance of the Eucharist, and they condemned each other on at least some of their points of disagreement. This isn't especially aberrational-- doctrine matters, and they knew that. It's improper to pitch Protestantism as the Christianity that allows you to be the most ecumenical-- all you're doing in reality is _ignoring_ major doctrinal divides that gave rise to the various Protestant traditions in the first place.
3) All Christian traditions have different ideas of what counts as "essential" doctrine. The Roman Catholic Church and the Orthodox Church have dogma, and especially those of the ecumenical councils which are the most unambiguously "essential". If you don't accept those, you still don't share "essential Christian doctrine".
It's also for this reason that you can't claim that exclusive claims on the fullness of truth somehow yield disunity. They don't yield disunity any more than a vague ecumenism, and they're also more consistent. There's never going to be unity between people who can't even agree on what the Eucharist is or does, or whether it's a sacrifice, or whether the saints can intercede for us in Heaven, or whether God still works miracles, or the manner in which Christ saves us, or whether God predestines to heaven _and_ hell-- and so on.
4) Anathema is Church discipline, meted out by bishops. Furthermore, because it's Church discipline, it can only be applied to those visibly in the Church. The layman would never be in a position where they'd declare anathema on another, let alone a non-Orthodox Christian.
If Sola Scriptura was correct the Bible would be written more like a Constitution with a convenient list of doctrines and narratives which are dogmatic. Instead we have the laws of Moses, the Psalms/wisdom books, historical narratives, the Prophets, the Gospels, Acts, and letters to specific Churches. If you read the book of Acts, the last chapter seems to be cut prematurely if one is Orthodox one understands this is because the lives of the saints didn't end in Acts. Furthermore, there is no reference to what Books are Canonical or the doctrince of Sola Scripture being explicitly stated. Thus Sola Scripture is a tradition of man. And holy tradition of the living Church holds greater weight than such arbitrary opinion.
Glad to see Gavin Ortlund getting refuted! God bless
Very interesting.
Serious question: Who gave the Orthodox Church the authority to officially call itself "Orthodox?" Because that name isn't in Acts. It's not in Paul's letters. It's not (as far as I can tell) in the early fathers. I really need to understand this as long as we're questioning Protestants on the issue of who gave whom authority to change things. Thoughts?
The Church considers itself as having "correct doctrine", which is what "orthodox" means.
I'm with you on the rock band worship team. It makes me sick how almost all the churches got rid of the hymnals and went to contemporary music. But that comes from the church growth movement.
@58:38 when Fr. Jonathan co-signed “all of the smoke” 🙏🏽🙌🏾
Im Catholic and watched this thinking you all were Catholic. Nice to see how similar we are.
Hopefully we will be one again as Paul taught.
At this rate, I think the Vatican is dead set on steering the ship of Rome into rocky shoals.
The fact that Rome appears to be angling for a possible union with at least Constantinople in 2025 while pushing "woke" LGBTQ++ agenda this year only increases the tide of red flags appearing even for Catholics since before and especially after the Council of Vatican II.
Asisi, liturgical abuses, Pachamama, and so on, I believe are only symptoms of a much deeper problem in Rome.
Im unsurprised to hear about Catholics leaving Rome for Orthodoxy.
Except that EO councils have said anyone outside of their church is anathema. Sooo I dont think you are that alike.
I was a Roman Catholic until Vatican II took hold in the 60’s. Fortunately, I was taken in by the Orthodox Church at the tender age of ‘62. A portion of my mother’s family were Protestant. Family gatherings were uncomfortable, not because of us, but a blind trust in their Protestant doctrine. A few years ago, I attended a relative’s funeral at his Protestant mega church. The old estrangement was present. I was definitely the outsider even though these were close relatives.
I was not allowed “in” and have not heard from them since.
The amazing part for me out of this close minded attitude is that so many Orthodox priests I’ve known have come from these Churches and were often their ministers. For me, the only Faith is the Orthodox Faith.
Great video, thank you!
Thanks Bonnie! Glory to the most High God! ☦️❤️
One note: I believe Gavin is actually a continuationist, in spite of his Baptist tradition. He has a video discussing this on his channel
Ortlund’s positions are truly ridiculous. And as the saying goes, contrary to what Ortlund asserts, to know and be honest with Church history is to cease to be Protestant!
Forgive me, but I don't see the problem with having a true Christian faith that is based in history.
@@campomambo
So then you'd be Orthodox. Since there is only One Faith.
@@acekoala457 yes! Unfortunately, there was another comment I was responding to that has since been deleted, removing the context of my reply.
We aren't a big fan of removing comments. Maybe he/she deleted his own comment.
I have never heard this saying
Does anyone know the 5 solas? And which two biblical solas are missing???
Curious to know what your baptismal Orthodox name is, Luther?
Justin ☦️
Why aren’t we taught this stuff growing up, seems pretty important. 😡
I hear you! I felt a similar frustration once!
I am protesting the protestant going Orthodox Lord have MERCY! This was good!
May God bless your journey brother ☦️
At 16:25 regarding the Trail of Blood: that book is panned in the history depts of Southern Baptist seminaries. I’m guessing Ortlund would pan it as well.
I'm with you on that. That is why I left the baptist church. I believe in icons, I don't believe the way the Orthodox do. I do believe, not all, but some Orthodox worship the actual icons. And believe it's slippery sloap to teach people to venerate pictures that are not God. But at the same time, I believe people who truly love Christ, have erroneous beliefs sometimes, and it's by grace that we are saved through faith lest anyman should boast.
Modern thinking is better in almost every way from science to anti racist
Lutheran here ready to convert to orthodoxy. Gavin Ortlund rubs me the wrong way. He portrays himself as an earnest humble theologian(I don’t buy it), yet his takes on orthodoxy and Catholicism are so far off it’s not even funny.
Let me know if I or we can help in any way!
Far too much grace afforded to ortlund. His "protestantism" is an amorphous mass that changes like a transformer, based on the features he needs in the moment. His goal is to prove he's right at all costs, not the pursuit of truth. I believe most of his arguments are formed in bad faith.
Spot on
John, my biggest problem with miracles happening today is people like Kathryn Krick, Rodney Howard Browne, Kenneth Copeland, and Bill Johnson.
I have a question regarding what was said about Schaff’s anti-Nicene fathers set. Can you enlighten me as to what other important parts were omitted? You mentioned the belief in Mary as one of the things Schaff’s biased approach caused him to edit out or put in footnotes only. I just bought that set to read the fathers, and I’d like to know what to watch out for in that regard. Thank you for this great presentation.
It is most obvious in the 7th Volume of the Ante-Nicene Fathers set, in the Ancient Liturgies section, in which any prayers to the Mother of God are reduced to footnotes, without any textual basis for doing so. Elsewhere it is evident in the text they did not select. For example, a book entitled "The Cult of the Saints: St. John Chrysostom," published by SVS Press, has a large collection of sermons by St. John Chrysostom on the feast of various saints. These are not to be found in that set, because they didn't fit the Protestant narrative.
hey Fr Whiteford if you wrote an article on this topic it would be great @@fr.johnwhiteford6194
Please let me make a minor point because I'm a Catholic. "Roman Catholic" can mislead people because it's vague. It can denote the Catholic Church because that Church's headquartered itself in Rome. The phrase can also signify the Roman liturgies including the Traditional Latin Mass and Catholics who attend it.
But there are Eastern Catholic liturgies, the Ukrainian and Maronite ones, for example. Although Eastern Catholics submit to the Pope, they don't hearing that they're Roman Catholic.
If they submit to the Pope they are still Roman Cathoic. Doesnt matter what they look like on the outside. They are agreeing they are in communion with the Roman see. That means everything that comes out of Rome they also must submit too.
If we are being precise, we won't call the Roman Catholic Church the Catholic Church because we believe we (the Orthodox Church) are the true Catholic Church.
I was hoping to learn something however all i know in 40 minutes is John has facts and his opinions quite interwoven and i am moving on waste of time here.
You left at least 3 comments complaining with no serious biblical or historical justification. Apparently the truth is bothering you. 🙂
In fact the way I saw people bowing to the picture at this Orthodox church I went to is the reason I never joined. Not all the people, but some I believe were idolizing the picture. It scared me.
Sounds spooky
31:56 Gavin Ortlund’s answer to this is because Oriental Orthodox are part of that same cultural climate.
I’m an Orthodox Christian myself but this is how I’ve seen Gavin Ortlund answer that argument in his videos.
Yes! Thanks for sharing that. It's unfortunate that he gave his audience such an unsatisfactory answer for this dilemma.
1.He doesn't offer proof, he just extends a hypothesis of apostasy.
2. Perry Robinson mentioned to me once there were oriental churches that were out of contact with all the others for many centuries, had no knowledge of many of the disputes, christological or otherwise and yet none of them were baptists and they all venerated images, Such is the case with the church of india for example.
So Dr.Gavin in hopes of trying to offer something that doesn't refute his claims of it being introduced centuries later has to provide a weak hypothesis not based on any data. He would have to justify his claim which he can't. So yes his theory doesn't hold weight.
@@TheTransfiguredLife thank you so much! 🙏
@@TheTransfiguredLife Say that to his face - reach out and invite him for a chat and teach us.
@@dogmatika7 pointing out that protestantism is a 16th century innovation isn't personal. We are just trying to state the facts.
Unintended by Dr Ortlund, but the graphic at 34:30 showing a book on a throne was its own counter-argument for me.
Wow, just noticed that. Great point! 🔥
Protestantism has the strongest tie to its own history. Go back to its very beginning where you can find the:
Toilet where Luther strained to produce the Reformation
October 23, 2004
Telegraph, London
Wittenberg: German archaeologists have discovered the lavatory on which Martin Luther wrote the 95 theses that started the Protestant Reformation.
Luther frequently alluded to the fact that he suffered from chronic constipation and spent much of his time in contemplation on the lavatory.Experts say they have been certain for years that the 16th-century religious leader wrote the groundbreaking theses while on das Klo, as the Germans call it.
But they did not know where the object was, until they discovered the stone construction after recently stumbling across the remains of an annex of his house in Wittenberg, south-west of Berlin, during plans to plant a garden.
"This is a great find," said Stefan Rhein, the director of the Luther Memorial Foundation.
"This is where the birth of the Reformation took place."
He said that until now little attention had been paid to anything "three-dimensional and human" in the writing of the theses.
"Luther said himself that he made his reformatory discovery in cloaca [Latin for "in the sewer"]. We just had no idea where this sewer was. Now it's clear what the reformer meant."
What makes the find even more fitting is that at the time faecal language was often used to denigrate the devil, such as "I shit on the devil" or "I break wind on the devil". Professor Rhein said: "It was not a very polite time. And in keeping with this, neither was Luther very polite."
The 450-year-old toilet, which was very advanced for its time, is made out of stone blocks and, unusually, has a 30-square-centimetre seat with a hole. Underneath is a cesspit attached to a primitive drain.Other interesting parts of the house remains include a vaulted ceiling, late Gothic sandstone door frames and what is left of a floor-heating system, which presumably gave Luther an added bit of comfort during the hours he spent in contemplation.
Luther, who was professor of biblical theology at Wittenberg University, nailed his 95 theses to the church door at Wittenberg, attacking the corrupt trade in indulgences. The act led to his excommunication but he was protected by Frederick II of Saxony and was able to develop and spread his ideas.
Professor Rhein said the foundation would stop at letting the annual 80,000 visitors to Wittenberg, who come in search of the spirit of Luther, from sitting on the toilet. "I would not sit on it. There's a point where you have to draw the line."
Very good and informative video. I wonder about traditions such as prayers for the dead, icons, and the importance of Mary. Are all the traditions that are being done in the Orthodox Church today, were they done by the apostles in the first church? Because let’s say a tradition started with later church fathers that wasn’t done by the apostles, one could say that’s a novel accretion the way that we are pointing out accretions from the video.
While you can find more evidence in the West because many sites were destroyed by the Iconoclasts in the East, (who were inspired by the Muslim rejection of Relics and Religious art, and later by Protestants who destroyed Christian art in the west, both sculpture and paintings, you can find in Amsterdam some former Catholic Churches that have recently removed the whitewash that covered depictions of Jesus in Biblical scenes because they were painted by Catholics) In the west (as it was in the East) you find among the catacombs and burial sites of Christians from the first and second centuries petitions written and carved into the burial sites, petitioning the Martyrs buried there to pray for those who are still alive. In Spain there are two sarcophagi found in the past year or two from a second century Christian Cemetery depicting the Assumption of the Theotokos into Heaven and other depictions of Jesus and Mary with devoted saints and people on earth. This has been brought up to Gavin, and since it does not fit his cherry picked proof texts (while he ignores other writings of the same Fathers who he says denied what they support in other areas of their writings.) He turns a blind eye to what he does not want to see.
Yes, these practices are Jewish in origin, and we in the Orthodox Church inherited them from our Jewish forebears. St. Paul and the Apostles, and most Christians for the first few centuries of the Church's life were, in fact Jews.
Prayers for the dead: This was certainly practiced by the ancient Hebrews (2 Maccabees 12:38-46) and St. Paul asks that the Church pray for Onesiphorus, a faithful Christian who had recently died (2 Timothy 1:16-18). The Jews continue to pray for the dead with a certain set of prayers called "Kaddish".
Icons: Not only do we find the tabernacle and the temple with icons in the Old Testament, but archaeologists have uncovered many synagogues dating from Jesus' own time period which were covered frescos depicting the Old Testament patriarchs, prophets, and forefathers. Similar iconography can also be found in Alexandria, Egypt in the form of frescos in Jewish synagogues which had a Greek influence.
Mary: Women in the Old Testament, such as Rachel the wife of Jacob, were highly revered by the Jews, and many of them made pilgrimages to her tomb to pray and ask her intercession. In fact, the ancient rabbis interpret Numbers 13:16-22 as Righteous Caleb going to her tomb for that very reason. The Theotokos, Mary the Mother God, is highly revered by Christians for similar reasons, as she is the Mother of God, and consequently the adopted Mother of all Christians. In the early Church, the Apostolic Fathers (those who lived directly after the last Apostle died) constantly cited the Theotokos as proof against the Christological heresies of the Gnostics who claimed that Jesus was not human, nor shared our humanity. Every champion and defender of the Christian faith in the following centuries such as St. Athanasius, St. Jerome, and St. John Chrysostom spoke of her as the New Eve, the New Ark of the Covenant, and the Mother of God.
also the church has binding authority to do things and rule on matters - which is apostolic. Orthodoxy being the church of the Apostles does not mean all external forms are vis a vis exact to the 1st century AD. This is a strawman of the orthodox position.
@@calebmullins8827What in 2nd Tim. 1:16-18 indicates that Onesiphorus had died? Paul says that Onesiphorus sought for him in Rome and had found him but I see nothing to indicate that he had died in the text.
@@calebmullins8827Numbers 13:16-22 doesn't even mention the tomb of Rachael or Caleb for that matter.
I would like to convert to Orthodoxy, but there isn't official french church. What I should do?
There's plenty of canonical orthodox churches in France
That's amazing. Where are you located?
@@TheTransfiguredLife Britanny, western part of it
@@iakov1906 as a catholic, I have to admit I get lost between all those churches. I get used to have "The" Church😂
@KartovOndulevitch actually in catholicism there's a ton of local churches too. Thered an antiochian catholic church, Greek, Russian, Ukrainian, chaldeon, syro-malibar, etc. The concept of a local/national church is in catholicism too.
I would have a hard time believing a picture healed anyone. Now I could easily believe God healed them. There are plenty of documented miracles. One in Oklahoma in 2014 made the paper. A child was born blind, and his mother for years prayed and believed that Christ would give his sight back. Even while her husband was attacking her for praying, she continued to pray in faith. And the boy received his sight. And the doctors said it was a miracle.
Concerning those who leave the Catholic Church because of what are alleged to be its moral failings, St. Augustine said: "we do not quit the Lord's threshing-floor because of the chaff which is there, nor break the Lord's net because of bad fishes enclosed therein, nor desert the Lord's flock because of goats which are to be in the end separated from it, nor go forth from the Lord's house because in it there are vessels destined to dishonour."
The RCC is not the Lord's threashing floor.
alleged? Can a good tree bear bad fruit?
We have one father because we are born of him. Gospel of john chapter 1: 11-13.
Hello🙂-at 51:46 Father John Whiteford says concerning Protestantism-"somehow that's when the gospel was rediscovered and prior to that nobody understood even even the earliest people in in church history that knew the apostles they didn't really understand the gospel because apparently the apostles were such poor teachers of the of the Gospel that no one really understood until Martin Luther came along"- is this what he really believes the official Protestant Christian position to be? I was raised a cultural Roman Catholic dead in sin (though not saying all Roman Catholics happen to be this way!)- It was only when I heard the gospel online through an evangelical ministry called Living Waters. Their chief evangelist Ray Comfort is who I heard the gospel proclaimed from- he learned how to proclaim the gospel from being taught by Jesus Christ and Paul the Apostle through the reading of the Scriptures, walking by faith in the Holy Spirit to make Him wise unto salvation by faith in Jesus Christ. Like the Apostle Paul, when Ray Comfort preaches, he uses the Law and the prophets to reason with people to bring the knowledge of sin and to prove that Jesus is the Christ who was promised to come that would be the Savior of the world, and it through repentence towards God and faith in Him that we can have eternal life. So, rather than the apostles being poor teachers of the gospel, this shows us that, on the contrary, Protestants believe the apostles were phenomenal teachers of the gospel, so much so that their written traditions in the New Testament Scriptures are able to equip us for every good work, including evangelism in the proclaimation of the gospel, thus why they maintain such a strong position on esteeming Scripture above all else. Please let me know your thoughts, as I am inquiring the Eastern Orthodox faith, but it is seeing fallacious claims and broad generalizations like this that push me further away from considering the veracity of the claims of their church institution. However, I am only now starting to investigate Church history and am excited to read the epistles of Ignatius of Antioch, so thank you for that recommendation-of course, I hope that we all can acknowledge that we read both Scripture/written tradition and writings of the Apostolic Church Fathers using our own individual personal judgment at the end of the day-but I believe if we have integrity and draw near to the Lord God in truth that we can come to sound doctrinal conclusions, as He says this is the case in His inspired word in an explicit, clear, and plain fashion-there is a degree of reasonableness we all need to maintain when reading Scripture and church history. Of course, though some doctrines may be clearly seen, this is not the case for all doctrines, as some are expounded on more than others-thus why Protestants argue and do not believe in doctrines such as making the Virgin Mary a central figure in prayer/praying to the Saints (Protestants would argue that Jesus Christ nor the apsotles did not teach us to pray in this manner, but would rather point us to examples like Jesus Christ giving us the Lord's prayer). I'll end my question and comments with a Bible verse from the book of Acts that detailed the establishment of the early Church- "But we will give ourselves continually to prayer, and to the ministry of the word." (Acts 6:4) Let us follow after the example of the Christians of the early Church and the Bereans in Acts 17:11, and acknowledge the truth of these Bible verses🙂Psalm 119:130, 119:9-11, John 17:17, 6:63, Matthew 4:4 and 1 Corinthians 4:6, 1 Peter 2:2, 2 Timothy 3:14-17 just to name just a few- may the Lord Jesus Christ have mercy on us all. In the Name of the Father, Son, Holy Spirit. Amen
I wish my town had an Orthodox church. I'd be there in a heart beat.
That's amazing!! How far is the nearest Orthodox Church from you?
Great video exposing the nonsense going on... 🥴 🌠
notice how orthodox focus on being orthodox and not being biblical?
The two aren't mutually exclusive. They go together.
@Jeff_Huston
they do not.
Certainly not by a Protestant definition (though that varies, by the very nature of Protestantism)
@Jeff_Huston i am neither catholic or protestant, non-denominational.
Protestant is not a denomination. It’s a term that refers to all non-Roman Catholic, non-Orthodox denominations (and I believe non-Anglican, too, though I’m not sure about that).
🙏🙏🙏
3 Questions. Why would a person pray for the dead? Where's the evidence in the Bible for it? Why hold any tradition above the word of God?
Prayers for the dead: This was certainly practiced by the ancient Hebrews (2 Maccabees 12:38-46) and St. Paul asks that the Church pray for Onesiphorus, a faithful Christian who had recently died (2 Timothy 1:16-18). The Jews continue to pray for the dead with a certain set of prayers called "Kaddish".
Watching Gavin in other videos, his own body language gives way to him not believing what he says himself.
Haha!! 😂😂😂
It's not funny. But of course if you belong to the one true church.
Wow, how did you get all that from body language? Are you some kind of expert? 😮
Gavin is probably the most respectful and kind person who disagrees with EO. Idk why you would say such a thing. Gavin has done his research and it sounds to me like you cant bear to see the evidence
Why does he state historical items with no facts or dates? He claims items have _accreted_ but doesn't give any examples with dates. To say X was added is not the same as saying it was added in 1529...like Protestantism.
As compared to say the Eucharist is _recorded_ in the first century.
When has once saved always saved been recorded? When was the first item written on this concept?
The video they examined appears to be an introductory video, so I don't expect for it to go in depth as much as, say, his polemics against iconodulia.
_With that said,_ I've never seen him actually try to substantiate his "accretion" claims. It's very much a "God of the gaps"-style argument for him, and it allows him to avoid scrutinizing the discrepancies that result from using Church Fathers (as well as Origen and Tertullian) in the haphazard, cherrypicked manner that he does.
I mean, if he actually considered these people as people that existed in the community that is the Church, he'd think twice about citing St. Epiphanius of Salamis (who professed the standard Orthodox doctrine of the dormition of the Virgin Mary) or Origen (who believed in the preexistence of souls and overall had an approach to interpreting Scripture extremely unlike any Baptist, Reformed or otherwise).
the accretion claim much as the other comment notes is a god of the gaps style argument, built on Ortlund's enlightenment presupposition of skepticism
Much of what you say is true, but you should know that Gavin isn't Southern Baptist. He's Reformed Baptist, a Calvinistic Baptist.
Yes this is true!
Also, Gavin is not a cessationist. He believes that all of the gifts of the Spirit are still active in the church.
You're right! That was a mistake on our part in regards to his personal view.
@@TheTransfiguredLifeThere are many Reformed Baptists who are cessationists, but not all. Gavin believes in all the charismatic gifts, but I think that he rightly questions and points out the abuses of those gifts.
No, they don't say that miracles ceased. They say divine revelation through prophets, meaning aka thus saith the Lord, ceased.
The response is a nothing 🍔
Like I mentioned in your last comment: you're more than welcome to provide an actual argument 🙂☦️
Ananaptists are not ancestors to modern day Baptists. Particular Baptists come from the puritans in England. Anabaptists for the most part were Arian, and also very militant and with twisted eschatology.
I am writing a critique of Protestantism for my friends and evasiveness is one of them, like when Gavin says we can be involved in idolatry as well as being Christian, pretty childish.