When I was absolutely losing my marbles about the EO, I was finding my way to every corner of the internet looking for answers, trying to find out the truth of all of this, wondering if it was really true that all of my ancestors were in hell because they were swedes who likely never even heard of the EO, and that I was going with them because something seemed so wrong. I was *desperate*. I remember one facebook group I was in, I posted a question and was begging for help, and sure enough, Pr. Schoopings wife commented saying that Josh would be happy to answer any questions I might have. Not a few days later, Pr. not only took the time to talk to me, but consistently made time to speak with me on the phone and guide me through any questions I had, and encouraged me to study, and handle this in healthier, more mature ways, rather than just panic studying. After a number of tear filled phone calls, I was finally able to slow down, take a breath, and *really* evaluate the claims made by the Eastern Orthodox church... Here I am today, serving as director of worship at one LCMS parish, Chairman of Discipleship at another, and studying in seminary to be ordained to the office of the holy ministry in the Lutheran Church. Thank God for pastor Schooping, and all that he has done for me, countless others.
@@EricAlHarb Yes. It does. You're either lying or plain ignorant (like most EO converts). I was in EO for 50 years before converting to Lutheranism and can confirm every word.
wait but John Chrysostom nor Cyril of Alexandria preached penal substitutionary atonement in the way it is understood in later Protestant theology? am i wrong?
@@Thatoneguy-pu8tyFunny thing is - you will probably find Classical Latin inscriptions and manuscripts out there with en instead of in ;]. The letter kills, including spelling uniformity.
What Orthodox believe about Christ’s Crucifixion “The last enemy to be conquered will be death.” (I Corinthians 15:26) The cross was not a bloody sacrifice to appease the Father's wrath and hunger for death. Rather it pleased the Father that the Son would give himself in order to conquer death. The following magnificent passage is from the Anaphora (consecration of the Holy Gifts, the Bread and Wine) of the Divine Liturgy of Saint Basil the Great. “And when the fullness of time had come, You spoke to us through Your Son Himself, through whom You created the ages. He, being the splendor of Your glory and the image of Your being, upholding all things by the word of His power, thought it not robbery to be equal with You, God and Father. But, being God before all ages, He appeared on earth and lived with mankind. Becoming incarnate from a holy Virgin, He emptied Himself, taking the form of a servant, conforming to the body of our lowliness, that He might change us into the likeness of the image of His glory. For, since through man sin came into the world and through sin death, it pleased Your only begotten Son, who is in Your bosom, God and Father, born of a woman, the holy Theotokos and ever virgin Mary; born under the law, to condemn sin in His flesh, so that those who died in Adam may be brought to life in Him, Your Christ. He lived in this world, and gave us precepts of salvation. Releasing us from the delusions of idolatry. He guided us to the sure knowledge of You, the true God and Father. He acquired us for Himself, as His chosen people, a royal priesthood, a holy nation. Having cleansed us by water and sanctified us with the Holy Spirit, He gave Himself as ransom to death in which we were held captive, sold under sin. Descending into Hades through the cross, that He might fill all things with Himself, He loosed the bonds of death. He rose on the third day, having opened a path for all flesh to the resurrection from the dead, since it was not possible that the Author of life would be dominated by corruption. So He became the first fruits of those who have fallen asleep, the first born of the dead, that He might be Himself the first in all things.”
@@josephmary969 So, this is one part of the Lutheran view, but we complete it by acknowledging that the Cross was a bloody sacrifice to appease the wrath of a holy and righteous God because we cannot ignore what St. John writes: "He is the propitiation for our sins" nor the words of Hebrews 9 and 10. It's a both/and, not an either/or. Orthodoxy has it partly right, but ignores the fullness of the Work of Christ.
Thanks for what you do, this channel was a beacon for me when I was seriously struggling with church anxiety and considering RC/EO. Happily had my family baptized into the Anglican Church this September. Pastor Schooping is great, and his work on PSA in the fathers is a great read for those wrestling
A great interview. And, Javier, what you said about the need for a positive setting forth of dogma, as opposed to only negating what in Rome and the East is false, is critical. God's peace.
Exactly. The last time I heard about this guy, he had left the Orthodox Church to become an Evangelical pastor. Now skimming the comments I read that he became an Anglican minister before leaving that and joining the LCMS. Soon enough it will be something else.
As a lifelong Lutheran who loved his church and took Confessional Lutheranism seriously, I had to become Orthodox. I simply can't fathom this man's decision. Lutheranism has zero claim on being Christ's Church. Zero. I love you all who disagree with me. And I totally understand. I used all the same reasonings against Catholics and Orthodox for years. For your consideration, shorts: ruclips.net/user/shortsPYCfHyl9BT8?si=LUHJvHC3MblMD19H ruclips.net/user/shortssCIw7nwi1x0?si=mFqzmX75fWZAJuLX God bless you all in your walks with Christ Jesus. I simply no longer can affirm Protestantism in any way.
I'm the same as him. I discerned Orthodoxy for a couple of years and ended up Lutheran. Once the "oooh, ahhh" of Orthodoxy wears off and you see it for what it is, you can never un-see it.
@GabrielWithoutWings never had any "oohs and ahhs". Nothing about Orthodoxy really appealed to me. It was Scripture and the Church Fathers. The Scriptures define the Church. What it is. What it looks like. And nothing in Protestantism fits. Lutheranism taught me Scripture. Scripture taught me the traits of the Church. "All truth". Not some. And that's all any Protestant church can claim. Being "more" true than their neighbors. But never the fullness of the faith.
@@MajorMustang1117 Well, hopefully you feel fulfilled there. I spent 20 years trying to discern between Eastern and Oriental Orthodoxy and Roman Catholicism. Ultimately, I rejected all of them. Lutherans are the Catholic Church in the West.
Schooping embraced heresy. He found an explanation that fit his disposition leaving the Church for modern innovations superimposed back onto Scripture. When a group of people usurp someone else’s Scriptures for themselves, 1500 years later, then innovate ideas and interpretations that never existed prior, this should be a red flag of warning, something is wrong. Further, when that one group turns into tens of thousands of different groups, all out of communion, holding thousands of differing interpretations between themselves, it’s clearly not what the Lord intended.
@@javierperd2604when someone usurps someone else’s Scriptures, then adopts ideas and interpretations that nobody held in 1500s of the one visible Church, and a group (the reformers) splinters into thousands of different groups all out of communion, holding different views one from another, something is wrong.
I find it interesting that his superiors seemed to shut him down out of hand and never really wanted to talk about it when he pointed out that vicarious atonement/penal substitutionary atonement is found not only in the Church Fathers, but also in Orthodox Hymns. As I understand it, and as I have personally heard it from Orthodox members, Penal Substitutionary Atonement/Vicarious Atonement IS a part of Orthodox soteriology, but is not emphasized as primary. Now, they could be speaking out of turn from the whole of the Orthodox church, but I have seen it affirmed more than once.
@@Outrider74The Orthodox Church does affirm an understanding of penal substitution, but just not what the Reformers innovated. The Church Fathers likewise affirmed the same which the Orthodox Church continued to maintain as far as Christ and His substitution. However, the reformers went off the rails. It’s not substitution or no substitution, but rather different lines of thought and levels of significance, one apostolic and one modern.
@@Outrider74 Met Kallistos (Ware) of Diokleia explained it somewhat like this (loosely from memory:) Salvation is a MYSTERY. Words and concept cannot fully embrace it. It is true that parts of the Church may be emphasizing some aspect or image over another in a problematic fashion. Some may even deny Orthodox dogma! The Church organization is not free from heretics, never has been. Joshua learned from problematic teachers. Such as the aforementioned Kallistos (on other matters...) Orthodoxy teaches that there are two sides to salvation: that which Christ has already accomplished and the human *yes* to this, which entails a lot.
As a Catholic, I thought this was good to listen to. I'm always interested in reasons why people convert one way or another. Certainly Orthodox to Lutheran isn't typical so this was especially interesting.
@javierperd2604 the LCMS are Lutheran. Lutherans, by objective reality, have open lesbian pastors. I've made no slander, only facts. It's also a sin to reject the true Church of Christ in favor of a fake church invented in the 1500s by Martin Luther so he could have sex with a nun.
'The Lord is looking to damn us on a technicality' - I would say it's more than likely the opposite. The Lord is looking to save us on a technicality from the accusations of the Evil one on judgement day :)
Crete is not a Council though. It hasn't been universally accepted at all, and two local Churches haven't just not taken part but actively published papers that show how at least the ecclesiological document is not Orthodox.
@@frankschaeffer8153 That means it's not an ecumenical council, but it was still a highly note worthy council in the Orthodox world. Kind of can't have an ecumenical council right now as it is, so that shouldn't really be a concern. The thing to note, is that this synod was widely accepted at it's time, and reaffirmed in multiple places and still is today. Josiah Trenham even included it in the appendix of his work Rock and Sand. Another point against the book, but many today in the Orthodox world openly accept it. Craig Trugila and his discord server being a place that do as well. Though they are a bunch of online ortho bros, so take that for what you will.
@@PracticalChristianLessons There have been many Councils (Ecumenical, pan-Orthodox, local) and there have been pseudo-councils. No doubt Crete will go into history as the latter, after the ecumenist-sergianist captivity ends.
@@PracticalChristianLessons There have been many Councils (Ecumenical, pan-Orthodox, local) and there have been pseudo-councils. No doubt Crete will go into history as the latter, after the ecumenist-sergianist captivity ends.
With respect, I am Catholic, but have done much reading into Orthodox Thelogy and Praxis and spoke to Orthodox priest, so I find Pr Joshua's Orthodox witness rather disjointed and how he understands the Orthodox teaching Polarised on some aspects but neglecting other teachings. It seems it took a very long time for him to understand who Jesus was, so I am not sure if he really understood in his heart what the Orthodox Faith was. His journey is not over yet, and by God's grace he will come to see clearly that the Reformed denomination is novel and a distortion of the Faith, handed down to us from Christ to the Apostles. Lord Jesus Christ, have mercy on us and the whole world.
@@Outrider74 Not the same thing but the same critique applies: Lutheranism began in the 16th century, Christianity in the 1st, so Lutheranism doesn't cut it. Even if one construes the Scriptures (and early fathers) to be in line with Lutheranism (which they are not) then one must admit that there has not been a continuous witness to a hypothetical Chrisitianity in line with Lutheranism through the centuries.
Awesome video, Schooping is a treasure of knowledge. His point about the “One True Church” thing is spot on, and using Paul’s teaching as an example was perfect. The 1672 Council of Jerusalem I feel is kind of the major blow to Eastern Orthodoxy’s Catholicity.
A Book Recommendation for questions about the Filioque, Read "The Filioque: Answering the Eastern Orthodox" by Brian Duong who is a Roman Catholic, who also has a YT channel that goes by the name "Dwong". He does a great job in defending the Filioque, a good book for both Protestants and Roman Catholics struggling with the Filioque. Another great book for those who are concerned with the idea of praying to Saints in the EO is "Against the Invocation of Saints: An Apology for the Protestant Doctrine of Prayer over and against the Doctrine of the Eastern Orthodox Church" by Seth Kasten from Scholastic Lutherans.
The Holy Spirit is one person, and so one eternal person proceeding eternally from both Father and Son? The Son being born of that same Holy Spirit that which, in the beginning was emitted by the Father who created all things?
I appreciated pastor Schooping's book a lot. People can accuse him of church hopping, but his observations (many included in this video) speak for themselves. To write them off because of the man would be to commit the Genetic Fallacy. You have to address the issues themselves.
Thank you so much for the book link and reading list. As someone who has recently left Eastern Orthodoxy and is considering Lutheranism, this man is an absolute gift of God - Well done and thank you again!
I respect that he is following his conscience as new information becomes available. Many people have long and winding journeys in one direction or another withing greater Christendom. What surprises me here was that the LCMS allowed him to become a pastor so quickly. Within a year or two? That is a very short window to give responsibility over a congregation. Am I misunderstanding the timeline?
He went from a short stint in the Orthodox Church, to now a short time as a Lutheran. Be that he may seem genuine, I question the LCMS's decision to make him a pastor, just based on how quickly he went from one to another. Where he really went wrong was becoming an ordained Orthodox priest so quickly.
@davidw.5185 Thank you for your question. Pr. Schooping did a Pastoral Colloquoy into the LCMS. Pastoral Colloquoys are for learned pastors of other Christian traditions who convert to Lutheranism, are willing to study Lutheranism extensively, and are then taken through a rigorous process of learning and being tested and questioned in order to make sure they understand and can articulate the Lutheran faith correctly and in a robust manner. You can find more info on that process at this link: www.lcms.org/about/leadership/president/pastoral-colloquy Additionally, in regards to another comment enthusiastic same thread: Pr. Schooping didn't do a "short stint" in Eastern Orthodoxy -- he was EO for a decade. I hope that helps!
@@308enjoyer The schooling for a pastor is three years post graduate. Many evangelical preachers have much less. I met a guy at a Messianc church doing a correspondance courwse.
that's because he is a pharasee in a false church. Of course there's no timeline. He can preach next to his gay and female ministers. Our home is the Orthodox church. Don't be fooled by a weak pharasee who God knows was never a true Orthodox man.
This is what happens if you make somebody a priest who never became Orthodox. With teachers like Met. Jonah and studying at St. Vladimir's Seminary that's not surprising. However, he did read the truly Orthodox Church father of our days, Fr. (now Saint) Seraphim (Rose) of Platina. So it's all the more unfortunate he didn't go deeper.
He is a false pharasee and we were warned about these "satan's little helpers" in the bible. He will get what's coming in the end for trying to sway God's flock from the truth. Weak little man.
To me, the Filioque is adiaphora. No matter what, the Three Persons are one, co-eternal. So, it doesn’t matter how you say it, no matter what, it doesn’t mean that one way infers a specific power chain to one or the other. They are still Three Persons, co-eternal, as the same God.
@ I’m Lutheran, and the LCMS officially affirms the use of the Filioque. I just don’t think it’s actually relevant to anything important within the faith. To me, if they’re all God, all co-eternal, it doesn’t alter their power dynamics in any way. Therefore, it’s moot.
Sadly what he says about Eastern Orthodox priests is true for some LCMS pastors. The BOC becomes the infallible authority and Luther an infallible teacher. How about addressing that?
No proper Lutheran will ever say Luther was infallible. And both the Book of Concord and the Lutheran tradition are made up of other theologians as well. The Book of Concord confesses that only the Bible is infallible. Go watch Pastor Will Weedon's interview on Matt Wittman's channel.
@@amcasci Perhaps a fair criticism but it needs to take into account that the BOC claims to be a true expression and summation of the truths of Scripture, so holding to it is equivalent to holding to the truths of the Creeds which are also expressions of the truths of Scripture.
@@amcasci Don’t expect the Apology to be perfect friend. After all, Charles would not allow the Evangelicals access to a written copy of the document and instead read had it aloud once.
I did not know that about the founder of the Christian Missionary Alliance church! It's interesting to note how many notable Church figures believed in something other than Zwinglism for communion. Luther, Calvin, Wesley, and now A.B. Simpson--that is indeed telling.
I think the "One True Church" thing comes out of Roman Imperial religion. If you weren't in The Church, then you were outside the Empire and outside the Emperor's sphere of control. Once the Empire died, the Orthodox have been unable to really do anything as a Church because they have no emperor. The Romans just gave all of the emperor's power to the Pope.
Rc is an offshoot from councils which are an offshoot from Scripture. They think Orthodoxy is Christ. They’re not Christ. They’re an offshoot from Christ. “Constantine Heterodoxy is the body of the Christ.” Christ is Christ. They’re an offshoot from that with their ecumenical councils. Who then developed an entire Constantine head of the council: Roman Catholicism. So you have Jesus Christ. Then you have Constantine. That’s how you get the heterodox. Then that’s how you get the Pope of the heterodox. So the body is Christ. They’re an offshoot. They make Christ “Orthodox Christian Councils.” An offshoot. Then someone has to become the emperor Constantine, to keep the Constantine faith going. Roman Catholicism. Another ofshoot offshoot. They make Peter the body of Christ. The reformation is not recreation. Thus our church started in the apostolic time period. If they hold to Nicae 2 John Damascene Gnosticism, the wrong development of Constantine Heterodoxy. Who somehow had authority to determine an ecumenical council (of who’s saved and not saved). Their church finally stopped developing in the 9th century. Our church, though visibly reforming in the 16th century. Is the true church that goes back to the original deposit of apostolic faith. Because our teaching isn’t gnostic John Damscene Heterodoxy. Our teaching is Bible apostle deposit only.
The Orthodox have held pan-Orthodox councils without the name "ecumenical council" attached to it. With no central authority, it has remained largely unchanged and its theology unified. Compare that to the "unification" under papal supremacy. Constant innovation and push toward ecumenism.
In the early first millennium, if you weren't in the Church then you were a pagan or in some sort of cult that none of us would say is a Christian denomination. That is why the statements of earlier saints are so absolute and later ones are not. You can't apply the early statements directly to the current context because they were not made in the current context.
Good interview. There has been a handful of LCMS pastors/priest, who became Orthodox priest. It’s interesting hearing their reasons why they covered. You should interview a LCMS pastor (s) who converted to the Orthodox priesthood. Do a compare and contrast. It is not uncommon seeing Confessional Lutherans gravitate towards Orthodoxy. Also, confessional Lutherans are not like most Protestants, they are liturgical and Sacramental, they are not in agreement on sacraments or the two natures of Christ with the Reformed, etc. It’s not like this Orthodox priest converted to be a Baptist that rejects sacraments and every aspect of tradition, etc. There are a couple former Roman Catholic priest turn confessional Lutherans in the LCMS. But it is far more common to seeing a Lutheran pastor or laity convert to Orthodoxy than the other way around. If confessional Lutherans switch traditions, Orthodoxy is a favorite destination.
@@lazaruscomeforth7646 the study of how God’s energies function within the created universe is paramount. Wikipedia: “Religious cosmologies describe the spatial lay-out of the universe in terms of the world in which people typically dwell as well as other dimensions, such as the seven dimensions of religion; these are ritual, experiential and emotional, narrative and mythical, doctrinal, ethical, social, and material”
@@Thatoneguy-pu8typerhaps this is an area of thought you could learn from. What we are trying to understand here is how God interacts with matter in our universe. Religious cosmology is a helpful study that relates to this video in many ways.,
So glad you got him in an interview. I talked with him on the phone when I left the EO, it was a great conversation and he was very supportive and kind
@@Legionxciv I see. I appreciate your answer, I’m not judging you one way or the other I am just trying to understand everyone’s perspective. But how did you come to orthodoxy? Was it through online content? Or some other way?
I appreciate the interview and know that this was touched on in it. Would you identify the authoritative sources of the Eastern Orthodox Church for me? Is there a book or books that you would suggest that contain those sources? The RC has the Catechism of the Catholic Church. The LCMS has the Book of Concord. The Presbyterian have the Westminster Confession. Is there a book, or books like that, in the EO that you would recommend? Thank you.
I was surprised to learn that the Orthodox liturgy has changed over the years ("The Orthodox Liturgy: The Development of the Eucharistic Liturgy in the Byzantine Rite", Saint Vladimir's Seminary Press, 1990).
@@ChristianHagood One "EO position" that I have heard a lot, one of the standard claims, is that the EO Church has never changed. So I am not quite sure how evidence that the liturgy has changed serves to convince you of the EO position.
@@bowrudder899 Never changed means the fundamentals of the faith, so something like our view of baptism or the Eucharist. We have many liturgies that we use regularly and it’s no issue in our view that they become more intricate over time. I found the development of liturgies fascinating and cool, personally.
@@ChristianHagood You mean like how many fingers you cross yourself with, or the other changes introduced during the Nikon/Old Believer schism? Requiring icons for salvation or unleavened bread during the Eucharist is total innovation, nowhere to be found in the first century church. Or again, nowhere in the early church did they say you need an EO bishop to be saved. That is EO innovation, an addition to the gospel. Poor thief on the cross!
@@andrewjung6987 What is sickening is that the church of Rome back on middle times were abusing peasants who didn't have money to even feed themself, just to buy them a fake promise that their love ones will be free of the purgatory. (which is fake, because Christ already died for the sins of humanity, so there's no middle point where one have to "purify" his sins after death)
@@andrewjung6987 Also, i have a question, Do you deny the abuses of the church of Rome during the middle ages? That, my friend, is sick... abusing poor people, selling them a fake idea of "freeing your love one from the purgatory", knowing that the peasants of that time didn't have money enough to feed themself and that Christ already pay'd the ultimate price on the Cross to free humanity from all sins (original, past,present and future). He made Himself a curse to save us through faith (Galatians 3:13)
Terrific discussion. Many Protestants have been going that way recently; it baffles me why anyone would give up the gospel, preferring to try and work their way into heaven.
I don't understand this obsessive Protestant fixation with hating "works-righteousness", and I say this as someone who grew up Protestant. Jesus says over and over again that we are to do the will of the Father, that we are to be his disciples, that we are to care for the poor and needy, and that we are to carry our cross for him. James explains in his epistle that faith without works is dead, and Paul says that we are God's workmanship and that we are to work out our salvation with fear and trembling. There's simply no way to read the Bible without concluding that it's absolutely essential for Christians to do good works. Good works are only a problem when we do them out of pride in order to boast about how good we are. (After all, true goodness comes from God.) But Orthodoxy has resources to combat this pride. We regularly confess our sins and ask for forgiveness, even calling ourselves the first of sinners before receiving communion. This practice of confessing our sins also helps in those moments when we feel like we're not good enough (which we never are anyway) so that we can experience forgiveness. True, there are plenty of Protestants who will admit that Christians should do good works, but in my experience, that always seems to be followed up with some weird overly scrupulous bickering about chronology, or a prohibitively convoluted systematic theology that is impossible for laypeople to grasp (which ironically sounds a lot more like "working your way into heaven" than anything I've seen in Orthodoxy). I just don't get it. Is this something that only makes sense to people who grew up with debilitatingly legalistic Catholicism (and never to lifelong Protestants), or does Protestantism teach that "we're saved by faith alone" is nothing more than the secret password to get into heaven? I've often gotten the impression that way too many Protestants have become so blinded by their hatred of Catholicism that they've completely lost the plot on what the Bible actually says about works. If I'm missing something, please let me know. And forgive me if this comment sounds too angry.
@@tylerborgard8805 Because the emphasis becomes the works leading to righteousness because of the works, not the works following from being made righteous through faith. Works-righteousness puts the cart in front of the horse and thereby goes nowhere.
I never thought about this before but the Muslim's mistake of naming Mary as a person in the Trinity sort of makes sense in light of the Mariology of the EO.
What do you mean? Islam does not affirm the Christian doctrine of the Trinity at all. Maybe you are talking about how the Quran critiques a misunderstanding of Christian theology by seemingly suggesting that some Christians associate Mary with the divine, though this is not accurate according to mainstream Christian doctrine and never was. But saying they believe in the Trinity is fundamentally wrong.
@@NVRSTP He never said they believe in the Trinity. He was just saying that it makes sense that Muslims's think that Mary is a part of the Trinity because of how she is talked about by the Christians they mostly interacted with. Muslims clearly aren't trinitarian and barely any have any notion of Trinitarinism but if you were some Muslim in Syria and the Christians around you were praying to Mary and would say "O Most Holy Theotokos, Save Us" you would probably get confused
@@Thatoneguy-pu8ty Heaven help the Lutheran Church (LCMS) if he's a pastor! I wonder what his "church stop" will be........Calvinism??? I HAD NO IDEA HE HAD ALREADY BECOME A LUTHERAN PASTOR!😭😢
Excellent interview - that comment "the saying 'to reject the doctrine of icons is to reject to incarnation' is the height of sophistry" was so on point.
The True Church preaches the Gospel that man is saved by Grace Alone through Faith Alone, the EO anathematizes this. They also reject the Biblical doctrine of the Filioque that is held by Church Fathers.
@ The Filioque was added to the Creed by Rome outside of Ecumenical Council. The only place in scripture that says Faith Alone is James 2:24. Sola Fide is a creation of the western reformers.
He is a false pharasee doing Satan's work. Not sure we want this weak excuse of a priest in the Orthodox church. He will have to atone for his wickedness.
One really has to wonder: If God can just impute righteousness and then one is righteous, why doesn't He just do that? Why require faith in the first place? It is written that the demons believe and they tremble. Are they saved?
"If you are protestant and feel like converting to Eastern orthodox, listen to christian wagner bashing orthodoxy, and if you feel like converting to Catholicism, listen to Jay Dyer bashing Catholicism"- Richard, Reedemed zoomer
And if you feel like converting to protestantism, listen to Jay Dyer demolish the author of said quote so hard he quits apologetics and bans Orthodox from his discord
@elKarlo your argument have nothing to do with my statement. Btw RD had already admit he is not good at debating. Btw NeedGodnet took Kyle to school in a debate. Go and watch it
The reformational traditions, at least most of them historically, believe in the real presence. They might nuance the details a little bit differently, and we should never undermine the details, but I always find going straight to the confessional standard of each tradition as the best way to know their understanding on the sacrament. That would be the three forms of unity for the continental reformed, the WCF for the Presbyterians, the 39 Articles for the Anglicans, and the Book of Concord for the Lutherans. Whether it is sacramental union or pneumatic real presence, they all affirm that the body and blood of Christ are objectively present in the sacrament. The differences would be in the modes and how they nuance these.
One of the list of ‘Pastors, Priests, Ministers that think it glorifies God to disgrace their former pastoral calling or Faith. It is shameful! Christians don’t do this to Christians! It’s like bragging about your divorce. What a mockery to those who don’t believe in Christ!
Interesting comments about Jesus' atonement! In my conversations with Catholics, I have almost always couched things in terms of propitiation and redemption, because I did not have any backup from early church writers for atonement theory. Pastor Schooping's remarks inspired me to order a copy of Packer's _In My Place Condemned He Stood_ in hope that Packer shares some good early church references. If anyone knows and would care to share some such references, please feel free, and TIA. 😊
Because of the world the apsotles lived in and the world we live in today, there is access and introduction to a labyrinth of human wisdom and understanding. Nevertheless, "No man comes to the Father unless the Spirit draws him." -John 6:44 "No man comes to the Father but by me."- John 14:6 "We are of God: he that knows God hears us; he that is not of God does not hear us. That is how we know the spirit of truth, and the spirit of error."- 1 John 4:6 *************** JOHN 16:1-14
The main problem with Eastern Orthodoy is their doctrine of synergism and the denial of original sin. This is the reason why they will never understand Luther's theology and will keep on ranting. Synergism directly contradicts the Gospel and it doesn't matter if you Orthodox say that you believe faith justifies you. With synergism Christ will never be in the center and you can do every rethorical and mental accrobatics you can think of, it won't change this fact.
What do you mean "Christ will never be in the center"? We do have freedom and ability to choose to love God and one another, If there is no free will, then there is no genuine love, nor can there be genuine faith. The good and the bad you have done in your body is your doing not God doing it, read: 1 Peter 1:17 And if ye call on the Father, who without respect of persons judgeth according to every man’s work, pass the time of your sojourning here in fear: 2 Corinthians 5:10 For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ; that every one may receive the things done in his body, according to that he hath done, whether it be good or bad.
Isn’t it a little problematic that this man went from evangelical (reformed Baptist), to being an Eastern Orthodox Priest, to back to evangelicalism and being a pastor in the Holiness movement offshoot, to now a Lutheran priest?
According to his own testimony on Issues Etc, Pr. Schooping went to generic evangelicalism from EO as a temporary landing ground in order to finding a Confessional tradition he could actually call home. In his own words in that interview “The Book of Concord stood head and shoulders above every other reformation confession”. Salvaging one’s faith from the rubble of a heterodox tradition like EO requires time to heal and assess what is true. Evangelicalism is where he originally came from, so it makes sense he would at least temporarily retreat to there before finding a new home. I’d argue if it reflects poorly on anyone, it’s Evangelicalism since they likely always knew his intent was to stay temporarily. Since it look him almost 3 years to become Confessional Lutheran after leaving EO, it actually reflects maturity that he took time to seriously research the different traditions.
@@TheologyVisualized so yeah shame for just having anyone pastor a church but also shame on him no? Start pastoring a church which you don’t know or agree with their tradition and doctrine. You don’t intend to stay.
@tkurzND He did agree with their doctrine insofar as he understood it was more right than EO and familiar given his upbringing. So it reflects more his knowledge of Evangelicalism given his history there. His intention in the CMA was reflective of needing a denomination that wasn’t as doctrinally non-committal as American Evangelicalism, since that was part of what pushed him into EO in the first place. Also, since he has a family to support and a call to pastor, it isn’t out of the question that he would seek employment from a group aligned to his former background while he figured things out. It is potentially frustrating that the CMA would bring on someone whose intention was always temporary, but it can also be viewed as them offering grace to someone pastorally qualified (in their circle) who was harmed by a different tradition, regardless of the tradition. I know that last part sounds like I’m reversing my opinion. The first comment was qualified with “*if* it reflect poorly on anyone…” which doesn’t necessarily mean it does.
He clearly was not very well catechized if Mary being raised in the temple is some scandal to him. It has been celebrated as a feast day for nearly 1500 years and is one of the 12 "great" feasts. To act like any of these ideas are "hidden" from the convert is so ridiculous.
I mean, it might take a long time for someone to learn about all these things, although they should have a year to read and hear all the festal services. But what I'm hearing is two problems. One, the need to systematize everything and have one explanation for how everything "works" as if we could fit God into a model inside our own brains. Two, unwillingness to trust that when you run into something that doesn't seem right to you, the Church is probably right and you're probably wrong, even though you can't see how; and to sit and wrestle with that as long as it takes, even it's years or decades or your entire life. This is why nobody should join the Church because they think it's correct on some doctrine; they will eventually find some doctrine they think it's wrong about, and leave. If you join the Church because you are convinced it's the Church, then when something poses you difficulty you're going to have to deal with it. The exact image of this is what happens in John 6:60-69.
Martin Luther did not invent a church. He studied the Scriptures and the fathers to learn what the historic truth was. Luther never even left the church. Rome broke fellowship (excommunicating Luther). The church that Christ instituted carries on and the Lutherans look to the Scriptures and the fathers to guide them. As we are warned in the new testament, even if an angel from heaven should preach to us a different gospel we should not stray from the truth. So popes and bishops and councils are subject to be judged under the authority of the word of God which is handed down to us in the Scriptures. The fathers, traditions and councils all help us understand those truths, but are still themselves subject to those truths. So this pastor did not "leave the church God started" to join a church "invented" by man, rather he submitted himself to the word of God and humbly listened to it calling him away from the opinions and inventions of men.
@@gladiusdecimus2253 that's objectively false. The lutheran sect didn't exist until Martin luther started it. That's why it's called Lutheranism, and not simply Christianity. There is a reason EVERY church in the Holy Land is Orthodox or Catholic. They received the Faith from the Blessed Mouth of Christ and His Apostles themselves, not some German perv 1500s years later. And it's pretty silly yo claim the Bible when it was the Bishops of the Catholic(both east and west) who gathered in Rome in 381 and told what the books where the Christian scriptures. Leave your fake church and follow the actual Church God started.
@gladiusdecimus2253 that's objectively false. The lutheran sect didn't exist until Martin luther started it. That's why it's called Lutheranism and not simply Christianity. There is a reason EVERY church in the Holy Land is Orthodox or Catholic. The recived the Faith from the Blessed mouth of Christ Himself and His Apostles, not some German perv 1500 years later. And it's funny you claim to follow scripture when it was the Catholic(east and west) Bishops who gathered at Rome in 381 and told you what the Christian scriptures were(all 73 books). The fact that Lutheranism, and every prot sect has female and lesbian pastors(VERY condemned by the scriptures you falsely claim to follow) completey vindicated the truth of the Apostolic Churches. Leave your degenerate sect and follow Christ in His Church.
I’m so thankful that Mr Shooping left the Orthodox priesthood and the Orthodox Church. He deserves to have what he desires and be where he feels more comfortable and at home. I only wish he would own the fact that no one forced him into Orthodoxy or the priesthood, those were his decisions that he made for himself as an adult. He’s clearly an intellectual dude, so I wonder why he didn’t figure out before he converted and then pursued ordination that he didn’t want to be Orthodox? Also, why does he devote so much effort to trying to critique Orthodoxy? Why does he hate Orthodixy so much, and go out of his way to attack it? I can tell you as an Orthodox Christian who actually loves Christ and the Orthodox Church, that Mr Shooping , for all his knowledge about Orthodox elements, understands nothing of Orthodoxy. I feel sorry for people who are misguided by his sophistry and think they are getting truth from him. I’m not going to take the time to try to point out his errors… there are so many in every minute that he speaks. I just read the Epistke reading for tomorrow which is 2 Timothy which says do not get into useless disputes , so I won’t. Suffice it to say that Mr Shooping’s approach to Orthodoxy is akin to Bart Erman’s approach to the Gospel. He can talk about it for years and write thousands of learned pages about it and yet… he understands it not. So that’s what you’re getting from Mr. Shooping on Orthodoxy.
@@EricAlHarbNo, he’s already done the whole “one true church” rodeo. If you bothered to listen to the video, he left the Orthodox Church for the the C&MA so he could study the Protestant confessions while being in a community that supported his understanding of the Gospel.
The blessed virgin Mary and the communion of the Saints, wonderful helpers and intercesors. This poor fellow remains afflicted by Luthers limiting and narrowing. He needs our prayers.
What substance did Jesus Christ infallibly instruct you that the Eucharist is in order for you to be infallibly correct what substance the Eucharist is? Protestant (except Lutheran) = substance of bread and wine. Lutheran = substance of bread and wine and the substance of Jesus Christ's flesh and blood at the same time. Catholic and Orthodox = substance of Jesus Christ's flesh and blood.
Technically Lutherans say it's a mystery referred to as both bread and cup/wine as well as Body and Blood by the Scriptures and Fathers. Also, the Roman Catholics in Australia made it clear that they don't believe the bread and wine are annihilated as they have been accused of by the Lutherans. That said, do you know if the Catholic and Orthodox teach that the remnants of Christ's Most Holy Body and Blood pass through the digestive system and are expelled? That would be abhorrent to the Lutheran, who is able to say that Christ's Body and Blood consume the communicant and the remnants of the bread and wine are passed.
Very fascinating Story. I appreciate Mr. Schooping opening up to the viewers and baring his soul. It's very hard to be EO in America as the culture and mindset can be/become too vast a chasm to bridge.
I don't get how you can possibly make videos promoting christians going from a denomination different than yours, to another denomination still different than yours. You just have a bias against apostolic churches and assumes all churches that aren't apostolic are equally valid. But how is that possible, if they teach conflating things ? If you're not sure which one of them is correct, how can you know that the apostolic churches aren't correct either ? One can't call a line crooked unless he knows what a straight line is. It doesn't make sense this collective allegiance for all protestant denominations (that support the trinity, not even the nicene creed as a whole is required, aka baptists). If any church can be wrong in salvation related doctrines like if Baptism saves or not, how can the apostolic churches be wrong if their difference to lutheranism for example is in the believe of Sola Fide ? If lutherans are right, catholics who trust in faith and works for their salvation are still being saved by faith alone, but baptist who deny the sacraments are going to Hell. That's why Luther urged the german princes in the Holy Roman Empire to kill the anabaptists and not the priests, because denying the sacraments was a matter of life and death, not the indulgences.
Thank you for explaining the orthodox church. Thank you for making it clear that venerating Mary and the Saints is worship, I have always thought this was worship, but others kept denying it. I also am grateful that you get into the very early church father's and that our LCMS Lutheran does agree with the early church fathers. Thanks for making the message about salvation through Christ alone, through faith alone.
@@AnglicanCuriosity What is there to repent from? It was a joke based on the sillyness of changing denominations that much. Might as well change religions
When it comes to the filioque he's just plain lying by omission. He paraphrases St. Gregory of Nyssa but this paraphrase does *not* equate to the heretical understanding of the filioque (that was later dogmatized in the fallen West at Lyons and Ferrara/Florence.) One *could* read it that way, just like one *can* interpret Scripture falsely. Schooping omits that the Popes not just did not adopt it but refused to do so until the 11th century. And that the filioque wasn't universally adopted in the West even after the schism. Yes, the history of the filioque is more complex than often taught (as is the case with virtually everything) but that doesn't mean the Orthodox view of the filioque history is incorrect. Not everybody has studied the intricacies of everything, and that's true pretty much universally.
Your disrespect for Mary is appalling. And so is your total lack of understanding of what it means to have devotion to Mary. Yes, Rome goes too far and sometimes the East too. But I practice advocation of the saints, simply asking them to pray for us. I often do that by asking God to bless me through their advocation.
Sad. He speaks as if he is an authority on Church history, theology etc yet he makes several false claims here. He is blind to his ignorance and misleads others.
We are to follow Augustine as is commanded by the early church, unlike the EO who oddly hate on him despite claiming to have the consensus Patrum and holding fast to the practices of the fathers of the early church. "We further declare that we hold fast to the decrees of the four Councils, and in every way follow the holy Fathers, Athanasius, Hilary, Basil, Gregory the Theologian, Gregory of Nyssa, Ambrose, Theophilus, John (Chrysostom) of Constantinople, Cyril, *Augustine* , Proclus, Leo and their writings on the true faith." 2nd Council of Constantinople, 553
@Thatoneguy-pu8ty it was a silly comment of mine; and not a very clear one. Of course the early Fathers in both East and West should be drawn from; and it's true that some modernist Orthodox have a very imbalanced and ridiculous view of Augustine and forget his many great contributions. (I'm not Orthodox). I was thinking more along the lines of his views on predestination, which are kind of in our 'mother's milk' within Western Christian circles of many types. I guess if you think some variation of Augustinian monergism (at least in regards initial justification) is essential because he somehow brought clarity to the muddied thought of the first four centuries, then fair enough. I don't personally. I'm persuaded - Scripturally, Traditionally, Philosophically and Logically - of the reverse: somewhat muddying a general and already existing consensus relating to election and perseverance. Anyway, blah blah blah, if I had to choose a Western tradition, it would be Lutheranism: escaping both the extremes of Calvinism and the delusional aspects of Charismania ; ) Peace in Christ!
@@emilesturt3377 Well, I'm glad you've clarified. If anyone knew anything about the Lutheran Fathers, they would realize how broadly they drew, from both East and West, in their theological thought and writing. If you're not Orthodox, what are you?
@ Matthew 7:13-14 "Enter by the narrow gate; for wide is the gate and broad is the way that leads to destruction, and there are many who go in by it. [14] Because narrow is the gate and difficult is the way which leads to life, and there are few who find it.
@@billkanelopoulos7165 so we agree, since Jesus was speaking of himself. 🙂 (Matthew 18:20) "For where two or three gather in my name, there am I with them.”
You gotta format your videos to not reveal everything so immediately. I was able to figure out the question posed in the title immediately. He's an eccuminist. Mystery solved.
Orthodoxy doesn't teach that we're saved by piling up our works to reach heaven. It teaches that we are saved by faith, and that our faith consists of what we do, not what we say. There is no functional difference between faith and works. Profession of a belief without the corresponding action is just hypocrisy. On the other hand, if you're doing what God commands then you are, by definition, obeying his commandments -- whether you know it or not. ("For when Gentiles, who do not have the law, by nature do what the law requires, they are a law to themselves..." - Romans 2:14-15) Protestant soteriology separating faith from works, and defining faith as rational assent to a set of beliefs, would tend to force them to conclude that an atheist or Muslim or Buddhist who practiced many Christian virtues in life, and even died to save the life of another, is burning in hell just because he doesn't assent to the fact that Jesus is the Son of God (whatever that means) and died to save him from his sins (whatever that means). Most Protestants intuitively feel this is wrong, but would have a hard time finding a place to fit that intuition into their theology. Orthodox theology doesn't force such a conclusion though, because it sees faith in actions. This means someone can worship what they do not know and be saved (John 4:22) or call out to Jesus as "Lord, Lord" and still be sent away (Matthew 7:21). One relief of this is that we don't have to live in fear that if we fail to evangelize someone, God can't save them due to our failure. God can do whatever he wants, he's God.
Correct me if I'm misunderstanding you, but it sounds like you believe the following: True faith is performance of good works. Believing and trusting that Christ has died on the cross for your sins does not save your, rather, the acting out of the Christian life saves you. A musslim or Budhist, if they do good works, are going to heaven without trust in Christ.
@@gladiusdecimus2253 It seems clear to me that doing good works alone is closer to true faith than a profession of belief alone. I can't speak to who is going to heaven or not, but I can say that God loves Muslims and Buddhists, and will save them if they are willing. The problem with following a false religion though, is that it might turn you into the kind of person who isn't willing to turn to God and be saved. On the other hand, even Islam and Buddhism as they are practiced today have been influenced quite a bit by Christianity. This is part of what Christ predicted, that he would "draw all men to Myself." Revelation shows all the kings of the earth coming to offer tribute to Christ, that suggests an even wider net pulling in more kinds of branches to graft onto the olive tree than we may imagine.
Faith is defined as having three parts, attention, assent and trust. For the Lutheran trust is the focus, if one trusts another's words then they live by them; "Christ was conceived through the Blessed Virgin's ear" yet sin was crouching at Cain's door speaking murder. put another way, trust necessitates action. A Muslim, Buddhist or Christian who trust a different spirit to the Holy Spirit do the work of the other spirit, they will the will of the other spirit (that is the will is bound to the one who is heard), they receive the reward of the other spirit; it's just the reward of unclean spirits is death. Melchizedek, Rahab, and Ruth put their trust in the Holy Spirit, despite potential lack of understanding, and by all accounts they live. The Holy Spirit isn't bound to only speak through the Scriptures and Sacraments, yet He has promised Himself fully there. I don't know where you're getting your queer ideas about Protestant soteriology, it's certainly not from any Lutheran sources I know.
Recently converted to Holy Orthodoxy! Thanks to you and Gavin Ortlund bringing attention to it. God bless y’all
@@ChristianHagood welcome home
@@fr.davidbibeau621 Thank you, Father
When I was absolutely losing my marbles about the EO, I was finding my way to every corner of the internet looking for answers, trying to find out the truth of all of this, wondering if it was really true that all of my ancestors were in hell because they were swedes who likely never even heard of the EO, and that I was going with them because something seemed so wrong. I was *desperate*. I remember one facebook group I was in, I posted a question and was begging for help, and sure enough, Pr. Schoopings wife commented saying that Josh would be happy to answer any questions I might have.
Not a few days later, Pr. not only took the time to talk to me, but consistently made time to speak with me on the phone and guide me through any questions I had, and encouraged me to study, and handle this in healthier, more mature ways, rather than just panic studying.
After a number of tear filled phone calls, I was finally able to slow down, take a breath, and *really* evaluate the claims made by the Eastern Orthodox church... Here I am today, serving as director of worship at one LCMS parish, Chairman of Discipleship at another, and studying in seminary to be ordained to the office of the holy ministry in the Lutheran Church.
Thank God for pastor Schooping, and all that he has done for me, countless others.
He has great character. Thank God for Joshua Schooping.
No Holy Orthodoxy does not teach this.
I’m sorry this man mislead you from
Truth.
@@EricAlHarb Yes. It does. You're either lying or plain ignorant (like most EO converts). I was in EO for 50 years before converting to Lutheranism and can confirm every word.
@@ScroopGroop Amazing
wait but John Chrysostom nor Cyril of Alexandria preached penal substitutionary atonement in the way it is understood in later Protestant theology? am i wrong?
@@joshuat005 no you are not.
Pastor Schooping is awesome! This channel is just top notch quality Javier 😎
_Verbum Domini Manet en Aeternum!_
in*
@@Xargxes sorry my Spanish autocorrect got to it
@@Thatoneguy-pu8tyFunny thing is - you will probably find Classical Latin inscriptions and manuscripts out there with en instead of in ;]. The letter kills, including spelling uniformity.
Great video. It is such a wonderful blessing to have Pastor Schooping with us in the LCMS. May God bless you both.
His description of the Orthodox view of atonement is not what I've experienced. His labeling us being like yoga is silly at best.
What Orthodox believe about Christ’s Crucifixion
“The last enemy to be conquered will be death.”
(I Corinthians 15:26)
The cross was not a bloody sacrifice to appease the Father's wrath and hunger for death. Rather it pleased the Father that the Son would give himself in order to conquer death.
The following magnificent passage is from the Anaphora (consecration of the Holy Gifts, the Bread and Wine) of the Divine Liturgy of Saint Basil the Great.
“And when the fullness of time had come, You spoke to us through Your Son Himself, through whom You created the ages. He, being the splendor of Your glory and the image of Your being, upholding all things by the word of His power, thought it not robbery to be equal with You, God and Father. But, being God before all ages, He appeared on earth and lived with mankind. Becoming incarnate from a holy Virgin, He emptied Himself, taking the form of a servant, conforming to the body of our lowliness, that He might change us into the likeness of the image of His glory. For, since through man sin came into the world and through sin death, it pleased Your only begotten Son, who is in Your bosom, God and Father, born of a woman, the holy Theotokos and ever virgin Mary; born under the law, to condemn sin in His flesh, so that those who died in Adam may be brought to life in Him, Your Christ. He lived in this world, and gave us precepts of salvation. Releasing us from the delusions of idolatry. He guided us to the sure knowledge of You, the true God and Father. He acquired us for Himself, as His chosen people, a royal priesthood, a holy nation. Having cleansed us by water and sanctified us with the Holy Spirit, He gave Himself as ransom to death in which we were held captive, sold under sin. Descending into Hades through the cross, that He might fill all things with Himself, He loosed the bonds of death. He rose on the third day, having opened a path for all flesh to the resurrection from the dead, since it was not possible that the Author of life would be dominated by corruption. So He became the first fruits of those who have fallen asleep, the first born of the dead, that He might be Himself the first in all things.”
@@josephmary969Death being conquered is not what is disputed by him. What that means is.
@@josephmary969 So, this is one part of the Lutheran view, but we complete it by acknowledging that the Cross was a bloody sacrifice to appease the wrath of a holy and righteous God because we cannot ignore what St. John writes: "He is the propitiation for our sins" nor the words of Hebrews 9 and 10. It's a both/and, not an either/or. Orthodoxy has it partly right, but ignores the fullness of the Work of Christ.
By the blood of Christ, through faith, we have been cleansed from all sin.” (Basil the Great. On Baptism, in ACCS NT XI, 96)
Understand that yoga means salvation by mystical performance, and it fits perfectly with the EO misunderstanding of asceticism and theosis.
Thanks for what you do, this channel was a beacon for me when I was seriously struggling with church anxiety and considering RC/EO. Happily had my family baptized into the Anglican Church this September. Pastor Schooping is great, and his work on PSA in the fathers is a great read for those wrestling
@UltimateCreedFan Thank you for sharing that! I'm really happy to hear the channel has been edifying to you and your family 🙂
You have been deceived by a false pharasee my friend. I will pray for you.
A great interview. And, Javier, what you said about the need for a positive setting forth of dogma, as opposed to only negating what in Rome and the East is false, is critical. God's peace.
Well needed! Can't believe he hasn't been on here before but loved what I read of his book and so excited to see he finally got a spot on the show.
It's funny this guy has left like 3 other protestant churches but the story is always about how he left EO.
I thought he looked familiar. The last time I saw him he was an anglican. Some of us take long and twisted road. Lol
Yea according the latest news thumbnail should be like this "why this evangelical pastor became Lutheran." lol
Exactly. The last time I heard about this guy, he had left the Orthodox Church to become an Evangelical pastor. Now skimming the comments I read that he became an Anglican minister before leaving that and joining the LCMS. Soon enough it will be something else.
@@alepine1986 the best we can do beyond speculation is to pray for him.
@@308enjoyer You're right. And I shouldn't judge him. I was wrong to do so.
Really looking forward to this!!!
As a lifelong Lutheran who loved his church and took Confessional Lutheranism seriously, I had to become Orthodox. I simply can't fathom this man's decision. Lutheranism has zero claim on being Christ's Church. Zero.
I love you all who disagree with me. And I totally understand. I used all the same reasonings against Catholics and Orthodox for years.
For your consideration, shorts:
ruclips.net/user/shortsPYCfHyl9BT8?si=LUHJvHC3MblMD19H
ruclips.net/user/shortssCIw7nwi1x0?si=mFqzmX75fWZAJuLX
God bless you all in your walks with Christ Jesus. I simply no longer can affirm Protestantism in any way.
I'm the same as him. I discerned Orthodoxy for a couple of years and ended up Lutheran. Once the "oooh, ahhh" of Orthodoxy wears off and you see it for what it is, you can never un-see it.
@GabrielWithoutWings never had any "oohs and ahhs". Nothing about Orthodoxy really appealed to me. It was Scripture and the Church Fathers. The Scriptures define the Church. What it is. What it looks like. And nothing in Protestantism fits. Lutheranism taught me Scripture. Scripture taught me the traits of the Church. "All truth". Not some. And that's all any Protestant church can claim. Being "more" true than their neighbors. But never the fullness of the faith.
@@MajorMustang1117 Well, hopefully you feel fulfilled there. I spent 20 years trying to discern between Eastern and Oriental Orthodoxy and Roman Catholicism. Ultimately, I rejected all of them.
Lutherans are the Catholic Church in the West.
AS a lifelong Lutheran who takes the Confessions seriously, I have had to reject Orthodoxy and Rome both as incomplete and errant.
I'm a little confused. Why did you feel that you had to become Orthodox?
"The Gospel is for Christians, too." Amen!
@javier perdomo! I love your content please keep up the good work! I love all your interviews : ) Thanks to Joshua Schooping as well.
I went and listened to Pastor Schooping's Christmas day sermon and it was great.
Schooping embraced heresy. He found an explanation that fit his disposition leaving the Church for modern innovations superimposed back onto Scripture.
When a group of people usurp someone else’s Scriptures for themselves, 1500 years later, then innovate ideas and interpretations that never existed prior, this should be a red flag of warning, something is wrong. Further, when that one group turns into tens of thousands of different groups, all out of communion, holding thousands of differing interpretations between themselves, it’s clearly not what the Lord intended.
@@ProtestantismLeftBehind Nope. Pr. Schooping found the church in its fullest.
@@javierperd2604when someone usurps someone else’s Scriptures, then adopts ideas and interpretations that nobody held in 1500s of the one visible Church, and a group (the reformers) splinters into thousands of different groups all out of communion, holding different views one from another, something is wrong.
I find it interesting that his superiors seemed to shut him down out of hand and never really wanted to talk about it when he pointed out that vicarious atonement/penal substitutionary atonement is found not only in the Church Fathers, but also in Orthodox Hymns.
As I understand it, and as I have personally heard it from Orthodox members, Penal Substitutionary Atonement/Vicarious Atonement IS a part of Orthodox soteriology, but is not emphasized as primary. Now, they could be speaking out of turn from the whole of the Orthodox church, but I have seen it affirmed more than once.
@@Outrider74The Orthodox Church does affirm an understanding of penal substitution, but just not what the Reformers innovated. The Church Fathers likewise affirmed the same which the Orthodox Church continued to maintain as far as Christ and His substitution. However, the reformers went off the rails. It’s not substitution or no substitution, but rather different lines of thought and levels of significance, one apostolic and one modern.
@@Outrider74 Met Kallistos (Ware) of Diokleia explained it somewhat like this (loosely from memory:) Salvation is a MYSTERY. Words and concept cannot fully embrace it. It is true that parts of the Church may be emphasizing some aspect or image over another in a problematic fashion. Some may even deny Orthodox dogma! The Church organization is not free from heretics, never has been. Joshua learned from problematic teachers. Such as the aforementioned Kallistos (on other matters...) Orthodoxy teaches that there are two sides to salvation: that which Christ has already accomplished and the human *yes* to this, which entails a lot.
I AM SO UNBELIEVABLY EXCITED
As a Catholic, I thought this was good to listen to. I'm always interested in reasons why people convert one way or another. Certainly Orthodox to Lutheran isn't typical so this was especially interesting.
Thank you for listening!
Pretty dumb to leave a real apostolic church to go to a fake church that has lesbian pastors.
Same here. Very fascinating especially since I went from EO to Catholic.
@@hamie7624 The LCMS has no female pastors and teaches that homosexuality is sinful.
Lies and slander are sinful, btw.
@javierperd2604 the LCMS are Lutheran. Lutherans, by objective reality, have open lesbian pastors. I've made no slander, only facts. It's also a sin to reject the true Church of Christ in favor of a fake church invented in the 1500s by Martin Luther so he could have sex with a nun.
Fellow massage therapist here who is looking to go into seminary.
I know Fr Schooping. Great man! Great listening
Thank you for taking the time to listen to this episode!
So have you become a Protestant, too, Erick?
'The Lord is looking to damn us on a technicality' - I would say it's more than likely the opposite. The Lord is looking to save us on a technicality from the accusations of the Evil one on judgement day :)
Wonderful interview as always, and very good noting of the acceptance of the Synod at multiple places including Crete.
Crete is not a Council though. It hasn't been universally accepted at all, and two local Churches haven't just not taken part but actively published papers that show how at least the ecclesiological document is not Orthodox.
@@frankschaeffer8153 That means it's not an ecumenical council, but it was still a highly note worthy council in the Orthodox world. Kind of can't have an ecumenical council right now as it is, so that shouldn't really be a concern. The thing to note, is that this synod was widely accepted at it's time, and reaffirmed in multiple places and still is today. Josiah Trenham even included it in the appendix of his work Rock and Sand. Another point against the book, but many today in the Orthodox world openly accept it. Craig Trugila and his discord server being a place that do as well. Though they are a bunch of online ortho bros, so take that for what you will.
@@PracticalChristianLessons There have been many Councils (Ecumenical, pan-Orthodox, local) and there have been pseudo-councils. No doubt Crete will go into history as the latter, after the ecumenist-sergianist captivity ends.
@@PracticalChristianLessons There have been many Councils (Ecumenical, pan-Orthodox, local) and there have been pseudo-councils. No doubt Crete will go into history as the latter, after the ecumenist-sergianist captivity ends.
With respect, I am Catholic, but have done much reading into Orthodox Thelogy and Praxis and spoke to Orthodox priest, so I find Pr Joshua's Orthodox witness rather disjointed and how he understands the Orthodox teaching
Polarised on some aspects but neglecting other teachings. It seems it took a very long time for him to understand who Jesus was, so I am not sure if he really understood in his heart what the Orthodox Faith was. His journey is not over yet, and by God's grace he will come to see clearly that the Reformed denomination is novel and a distortion of the Faith, handed down to us from Christ to the Apostles.
Lord Jesus Christ, have mercy on us and the whole world.
He's Lutheran, not Reformed. There is a significant difference.
So what's keeping you away from Orthodoxy then?
@@Outrider74 Not the same thing but the same critique applies: Lutheranism began in the 16th century, Christianity in the 1st, so Lutheranism doesn't cut it. Even if one construes the Scriptures (and early fathers) to be in line with Lutheranism (which they are not) then one must admit that there has not been a continuous witness to a hypothetical Chrisitianity in line with Lutheranism through the centuries.
Awesome video, Schooping is a treasure of knowledge. His point about the “One True Church” thing is spot on, and using Paul’s teaching as an example was perfect. The 1672 Council of Jerusalem I feel is kind of the major blow to Eastern Orthodoxy’s Catholicity.
A Book Recommendation for questions about the Filioque,
Read "The Filioque: Answering the Eastern Orthodox" by Brian Duong
who is a Roman Catholic, who also has a YT channel that goes by the name
"Dwong". He does a great job in defending the Filioque, a good book for
both Protestants and Roman Catholics struggling with the Filioque.
Another great book for those who are concerned with the idea of praying to Saints in
the EO is "Against the Invocation of Saints: An Apology for the Protestant Doctrine of Prayer over and against the Doctrine of the Eastern Orthodox Church" by Seth Kasten from Scholastic Lutherans.
This👍
The Holy Spirit is one person, and so one eternal person proceeding eternally from both Father and Son? The Son being born of that same Holy Spirit that which, in the beginning was emitted by the Father who created all things?
Imagine not listening to Lord of Spirits
To be fair, Lord of Spirits is affirming my Lutheran tradition, just with the challenge of spirits/saints over nations.
I appreciated pastor Schooping's book a lot. People can accuse him of church hopping, but his observations (many included in this video) speak for themselves. To write them off because of the man would be to commit the Genetic Fallacy. You have to address the issues themselves.
Thank you so much for the book link and reading list. As someone who has recently left Eastern Orthodoxy and is considering Lutheranism, this man is an absolute gift of God - Well done and thank you again!
Your tag describes you perfectly. You have been deceived by false pharasees. I will pray for you my friend.
I respect that he is following his conscience as new information becomes available. Many people have long and winding journeys in one direction or another withing greater Christendom. What surprises me here was that the LCMS allowed him to become a pastor so quickly. Within a year or two? That is a very short window to give responsibility over a congregation. Am I misunderstanding the timeline?
He went from a short stint in the Orthodox Church, to now a short time as a Lutheran. Be that he may seem genuine, I question the LCMS's decision to make him a pastor, just based on how quickly he went from one to another. Where he really went wrong was becoming an ordained Orthodox priest so quickly.
@davidw.5185 Thank you for your question.
Pr. Schooping did a Pastoral Colloquoy into the LCMS. Pastoral Colloquoys are for learned pastors of other Christian traditions who convert to Lutheranism, are willing to study Lutheranism extensively, and are then taken through a rigorous process of learning and being tested and questioned in order to make sure they understand and can articulate the Lutheran faith correctly and in a robust manner.
You can find more info on that process at this link: www.lcms.org/about/leadership/president/pastoral-colloquy
Additionally, in regards to another comment enthusiastic same thread: Pr. Schooping didn't do a "short stint" in Eastern Orthodoxy -- he was EO for a decade.
I hope that helps!
@@308enjoyer The schooling for a pastor is three years post graduate. Many evangelical preachers have much less. I met a guy at a Messianc church doing a correspondance courwse.
@@308enjoyer well, you don't ordain yourself. So really it's the fault of those who did ordain him.
that's because he is a pharasee in a false church. Of course there's no timeline. He can preach next to his gay and female ministers. Our home is the Orthodox church. Don't be fooled by a weak pharasee who God knows was never a true Orthodox man.
This is what happens if you make somebody a priest who never became Orthodox. With teachers like Met. Jonah and studying at St. Vladimir's Seminary that's not surprising. However, he did read the truly Orthodox Church father of our days, Fr. (now Saint) Seraphim (Rose) of Platina. So it's all the more unfortunate he didn't go deeper.
He is a false pharasee and we were warned about these "satan's little helpers" in the bible. He will get what's coming in the end for trying to sway God's flock from the truth. Weak little man.
Great to see another show!
YAY THIS DROPPED ON MY BIRTHDAY
Happy Birthday!
Happy Birthday!
Yo! Happy birthday, dude!
@@Thatoneguy-pu8tythank you so much!!
@@juan_xd42thank you Juan, my brother!!
Wow! Amazing!
To me, the Filioque is adiaphora. No matter what, the Three Persons are one, co-eternal. So, it doesn’t matter how you say it, no matter what, it doesn’t mean that one way infers a specific power chain to one or the other. They are still Three Persons, co-eternal, as the same God.
Agreed, I really don’t get the argument ( I.e. St. Greg if Palamas) that affirming the filioque necessarily = affirming two first causes.
The EO formally condemns the filioque as anathema and therefore, according to their theology of the Keys, necessitates one go to eternal hell.
@ I’m Lutheran, and the LCMS officially affirms the use of the Filioque. I just don’t think it’s actually relevant to anything important within the faith. To me, if they’re all God, all co-eternal, it doesn’t alter their power dynamics in any way. Therefore, it’s moot.
@@backyard_pitmaster2893 - It may seem like that, but it wasn't for nothing that the Fathers East and West affirmed the doctrine of the filioque.
@@backyard_pitmaster2893 exactly.
Sadly what he says about Eastern Orthodox priests is true for some LCMS pastors. The BOC becomes the infallible authority and Luther an infallible teacher. How about addressing that?
No proper Lutheran will ever say Luther was infallible. And both the Book of Concord and the Lutheran tradition are made up of other theologians as well. The Book of Concord confesses that only the Bible is infallible. Go watch Pastor Will Weedon's interview on Matt Wittman's channel.
@@theodosios2615 I would hope you are right but too many discussions end with BOC days or Luther said.
@@amcasci Perhaps a fair criticism but it needs to take into account that the BOC claims to be a true expression and summation of the truths of Scripture, so holding to it is equivalent to holding to the truths of the Creeds which are also expressions of the truths of Scripture.
I find some comments in the ApAc article 4 to be less than accurate representations of the Roman Confutation.
@@amcasci Don’t expect the Apology to be perfect friend. After all, Charles would not allow the Evangelicals access to a written copy of the document and instead read had it aloud once.
I did not know that about the founder of the Christian Missionary Alliance church!
It's interesting to note how many notable Church figures believed in something other than Zwinglism for communion. Luther, Calvin, Wesley, and now A.B. Simpson--that is indeed telling.
I think the "One True Church" thing comes out of Roman Imperial religion. If you weren't in The Church, then you were outside the Empire and outside the Emperor's sphere of control. Once the Empire died, the Orthodox have been unable to really do anything as a Church because they have no emperor. The Romans just gave all of the emperor's power to the Pope.
So true, this aspect of church history is so rarely talked about, at least within apologetic circles.
Rc is an offshoot from councils which are an offshoot from Scripture. They think Orthodoxy is Christ. They’re not Christ. They’re an offshoot from Christ. “Constantine Heterodoxy is the body of the Christ.” Christ is Christ. They’re an offshoot from that with their ecumenical councils. Who then developed an entire Constantine head of the council: Roman Catholicism. So you have Jesus Christ. Then you have Constantine. That’s how you get the heterodox. Then that’s how you get the Pope of the heterodox. So the body is Christ. They’re an offshoot. They make Christ “Orthodox Christian Councils.” An offshoot. Then someone has to become the emperor Constantine, to keep the Constantine faith going. Roman Catholicism. Another ofshoot offshoot. They make Peter the body of Christ.
The reformation is not recreation. Thus our church started in the apostolic time period. If they hold to Nicae 2 John Damascene Gnosticism, the wrong development of Constantine Heterodoxy. Who somehow had authority to determine an ecumenical council (of who’s saved and not saved). Their church finally stopped developing in the 9th century. Our church, though visibly reforming in the 16th century. Is the true church that goes back to the original deposit of apostolic faith. Because our teaching isn’t gnostic John Damscene Heterodoxy. Our teaching is Bible apostle deposit only.
The Orthodox have held pan-Orthodox councils without the name "ecumenical council" attached to it. With no central authority, it has remained largely unchanged and its theology unified. Compare that to the "unification" under papal supremacy. Constant innovation and push toward ecumenism.
In the early first millennium, if you weren't in the Church then you were a pagan or in some sort of cult that none of us would say is a Christian denomination. That is why the statements of earlier saints are so absolute and later ones are not. You can't apply the early statements directly to the current context because they were not made in the current context.
@@OrthoHoppean You guys can't even decide whether to re-baptize converts or not and you can't hold a council without Moscow or Antioch not attending.
Good interview. There has been a handful of LCMS pastors/priest, who became Orthodox priest. It’s interesting hearing their reasons why they covered. You should interview a LCMS pastor (s) who converted to the Orthodox priesthood. Do a compare and contrast. It is not uncommon seeing Confessional Lutherans gravitate towards Orthodoxy.
Also, confessional Lutherans are not like most Protestants, they are liturgical and Sacramental, they are not in agreement on sacraments or the two natures of Christ with the Reformed, etc. It’s not like this Orthodox priest converted to be a Baptist that rejects sacraments and every aspect of tradition, etc. There are a couple former Roman Catholic priest turn confessional Lutherans in the LCMS. But it is far more common to seeing a Lutheran pastor or laity convert to Orthodoxy than the other way around. If confessional Lutherans switch traditions, Orthodoxy is a favorite destination.
So real presence in the Eucharist, but no presence in the icons? This guy needs a consistent cosmology
Yes because cosmology is the field of study we’re discussing here
God promises to be present in the Eucharist. He doesn't promise to be present in representations. Cosmology has nothing to do with it.
@@lazaruscomeforth7646 the study of how God’s energies function within the created universe is paramount.
Wikipedia: “Religious cosmologies describe the spatial lay-out of the universe in terms of the world in which people typically dwell as well as other dimensions, such as the seven dimensions of religion; these are ritual, experiential and emotional, narrative and mythical, doctrinal, ethical, social, and material”
@@Thatoneguy-pu8typerhaps this is an area of thought you could learn from. What we are trying to understand here is how God interacts with matter in our universe. Religious cosmology is a helpful study that relates to this video in many ways.,
@@lazaruscomeforth7646futhermore, God is present in people, which are icons of Christ.
So glad you got him in an interview. I talked with him on the phone when I left the EO, it was a great conversation and he was very supportive and kind
Interesting! Where are you now?
How long were you EO?
@@doomslayer3076 I was in the EO church almost 4 years
@@ministeriosemmanuel638 Now i attend a very biblically solid Anglican Evangelical Church with my wife, and I consider myself reformed
@@Legionxciv I see. I appreciate your answer, I’m not judging you one way or the other I am just trying to understand everyone’s perspective.
But how did you come to orthodoxy? Was it through online content? Or some other way?
I appreciate the interview and know that this was touched on in it. Would you identify the authoritative sources of the Eastern Orthodox Church for me? Is there a book or books that you would suggest that contain those sources? The RC has the Catechism of the Catholic Church. The LCMS has the Book of Concord. The Presbyterian have the Westminster Confession. Is there a book, or books like that, in the EO that you would recommend? Thank you.
Changing your churches is like changing your clothes, yet you same person underneath
I was surprised to learn that the Orthodox liturgy has changed over the years ("The Orthodox Liturgy: The Development of the Eucharistic Liturgy in the Byzantine Rite", Saint Vladimir's Seminary Press, 1990).
Great book! One of the ones that convinced me of the EO position!
@@ChristianHagood One "EO position" that I have heard a lot, one of the standard claims, is that the EO Church has never changed. So I am not quite sure how evidence that the liturgy has changed serves to convince you of the EO position.
@@bowrudder899 Never changed means the fundamentals of the faith, so something like our view of baptism or the Eucharist. We have many liturgies that we use regularly and it’s no issue in our view that they become more intricate over time. I found the development of liturgies fascinating and cool, personally.
@@ChristianHagood You mean like how many fingers you cross yourself with, or the other changes introduced during the Nikon/Old Believer schism? Requiring icons for salvation or unleavened bread during the Eucharist is total innovation, nowhere to be found in the first century church. Or again, nowhere in the early church did they say you need an EO bishop to be saved. That is EO innovation, an addition to the gospel. Poor thief on the cross!
Pastor Weden had his first call at my church. I joke that I helpd break him in.
He's just found real Orthodoxy minus the errors of EO.
lmao
This is a wild take.
@@SUDRLANDIAfr 😂
lutherans might be the most embarrasing heresy. All the pride of roman catholics with all the absurdity of evangelicals.
🙏 👌
Great video
Welcome. I had a long twisted journey to Confessional Lutheranism., the true catholic, Apostolic faith.
God's peace be with you.
Me too.
Imagine thinking the first 1500 years of the church was incorrect until Luther came along to clarify things. Sickening.
@@andrewjung6987 That's not what Luther thought, nor what us Lutherans think. I encourage you to read Luther and the Reform Fathers.
God bless.
@@andrewjung6987 What is sickening is that the church of Rome back on middle times were abusing peasants who didn't have money to even feed themself, just to buy them a fake promise that their love ones will be free of the purgatory. (which is fake, because Christ already died for the sins of humanity, so there's no middle point where one have to "purify" his sins after death)
@@andrewjung6987 Also, i have a question, Do you deny the abuses of the church of Rome during the middle ages?
That, my friend, is sick... abusing poor people, selling them a fake idea of "freeing your love one from the purgatory", knowing that the peasants of that time didn't have money enough to feed themself and that Christ already pay'd the ultimate price on the Cross to free humanity from all sins (original, past,present and future). He made Himself a curse to save us through faith (Galatians 3:13)
Terrific discussion. Many Protestants have been going that way recently; it baffles me why anyone would give up the gospel, preferring to try and work their way into heaven.
They don't view it as giving up the gospel, but rather trying to best practice it.
I don't understand this obsessive Protestant fixation with hating "works-righteousness", and I say this as someone who grew up Protestant.
Jesus says over and over again that we are to do the will of the Father, that we are to be his disciples, that we are to care for the poor and needy, and that we are to carry our cross for him. James explains in his epistle that faith without works is dead, and Paul says that we are God's workmanship and that we are to work out our salvation with fear and trembling. There's simply no way to read the Bible without concluding that it's absolutely essential for Christians to do good works. Good works are only a problem when we do them out of pride in order to boast about how good we are. (After all, true goodness comes from God.) But Orthodoxy has resources to combat this pride. We regularly confess our sins and ask for forgiveness, even calling ourselves the first of sinners before receiving communion. This practice of confessing our sins also helps in those moments when we feel like we're not good enough (which we never are anyway) so that we can experience forgiveness.
True, there are plenty of Protestants who will admit that Christians should do good works, but in my experience, that always seems to be followed up with some weird overly scrupulous bickering about chronology, or a prohibitively convoluted systematic theology that is impossible for laypeople to grasp (which ironically sounds a lot more like "working your way into heaven" than anything I've seen in Orthodoxy).
I just don't get it. Is this something that only makes sense to people who grew up with debilitatingly legalistic Catholicism (and never to lifelong Protestants), or does Protestantism teach that "we're saved by faith alone" is nothing more than the secret password to get into heaven?
I've often gotten the impression that way too many Protestants have become so blinded by their hatred of Catholicism that they've completely lost the plot on what the Bible actually says about works.
If I'm missing something, please let me know. And forgive me if this comment sounds too angry.
I mean, that's not what Orthodox believe anyhow so
@@tylerborgard8805 Because the emphasis becomes the works leading to righteousness because of the works, not the works following from being made righteous through faith. Works-righteousness puts the cart in front of the horse and thereby goes nowhere.
Because the Bible says so lmaooo
I never thought about this before but the Muslim's mistake of naming Mary as a person in the Trinity sort of makes sense in light of the Mariology of the EO.
What do you mean? Islam does not affirm the Christian doctrine of the Trinity at all. Maybe you are talking about how the Quran critiques a misunderstanding of Christian theology by seemingly suggesting that some Christians associate Mary with the divine, though this is not accurate according to mainstream Christian doctrine and never was. But saying they believe in the Trinity is fundamentally wrong.
@@NVRSTP He never said they believe in the Trinity. He was just saying that it makes sense that Muslims's think that Mary is a part of the Trinity because of how she is talked about by the Christians they mostly interacted with. Muslims clearly aren't trinitarian and barely any have any notion of Trinitarinism but if you were some Muslim in Syria and the Christians around you were praying to Mary and would say "O Most Holy Theotokos, Save Us" you would probably get confused
If this man is a pastor, why does he keep abandoning his congregations?
He’s been a pastor twice. Once in the Orthodox Church and now in the LCMS.
Watch the video.
@@Thatoneguy-pu8ty Heaven help the Lutheran Church (LCMS) if he's a pastor! I wonder what his "church stop" will
be........Calvinism??? I HAD NO IDEA HE HAD ALREADY BECOME A LUTHERAN PASTOR!😭😢
Excellent interview - that comment "the saying 'to reject the doctrine of icons is to reject to incarnation' is the height of sophistry" was so on point.
Pray for him that He comes back to Christ’s Church. 🙏🏻☦️
The True Church preaches the Gospel that man is saved by Grace Alone through Faith Alone, the EO anathematizes this. They also reject the Biblical doctrine of the Filioque that is held by Church Fathers.
@ The Filioque was added to the Creed by Rome outside of Ecumenical Council. The only place in scripture that says Faith Alone is James 2:24. Sola Fide is a creation of the western reformers.
Pastor shwooping won't revert, highly unlikely that will happen😃
@ We can still pray for him. ☦️🙏🏻
He is a false pharasee doing Satan's work. Not sure we want this weak excuse of a priest in the Orthodox church. He will have to atone for his wickedness.
One really has to wonder: If God can just impute righteousness and then one is righteous, why doesn't He just do that? Why require faith in the first place? It is written that the demons believe and they tremble. Are they saved?
"If you are protestant and feel like converting to Eastern orthodox, listen to christian wagner bashing orthodoxy, and if you feel like converting to Catholicism, listen to Jay Dyer bashing Catholicism"- Richard, Reedemed zoomer
And if you feel like converting to protestantism, listen to Jay Dyer demolish the author of said quote so hard he quits apologetics and bans Orthodox from his discord
Dyer took Redeemed zoomer to school. RZ literally had nothing to throw out in their debate.
as if those people are in charge of ANYTHING in their respective churches. Bow Tie coal machine is not a good person to quote. Bozo moment
@elKarlo your argument have nothing to do with my statement. Btw RD had already admit he is not good at debating. Btw NeedGodnet took Kyle to school in a debate. Go and watch it
@elKarlo your argument have nothing to do with my statement
Any good resources presenting an alternative view to ex opere operato view of the sacraments?
The reformational traditions, at least most of them historically, believe in the real presence. They might nuance the details a little bit differently, and we should never undermine the details, but I always find going straight to the confessional standard of each tradition as the best way to know their understanding on the sacrament. That would be the three forms of unity for the continental reformed, the WCF for the Presbyterians, the 39 Articles for the Anglicans, and the Book of Concord for the Lutherans. Whether it is sacramental union or pneumatic real presence, they all affirm that the body and blood of Christ are objectively present in the sacrament. The differences would be in the modes and how they nuance these.
The book of Concord teaches how the sacraments do not justify ex opera operato
@@Presbapterian the reformed do not believe the elements are objectively present.
One of the list of ‘Pastors, Priests, Ministers that think it glorifies God to disgrace their former pastoral calling or Faith.
It is shameful!
Christians don’t do this to Christians!
It’s like bragging about your divorce.
What a mockery to those who don’t believe in Christ!
Fantastic video guys !! Great work !
Wow this pastor lives and breathes church history. What a gem to the Lutheran Church.
Interesting comments about Jesus' atonement! In my conversations with Catholics, I have almost always couched things in terms of propitiation and redemption, because I did not have any backup from early church writers for atonement theory. Pastor Schooping's remarks inspired me to order a copy of Packer's _In My Place Condemned He Stood_ in hope that Packer shares some good early church references.
If anyone knows and would care to share some such references, please feel free, and TIA. 😊
Bro, what an absolutely wild ride.
Because of the world the apsotles lived in and the world we live in today, there is access and introduction to a labyrinth of human wisdom and understanding. Nevertheless, "No man comes to the Father unless the Spirit draws him." -John 6:44 "No man comes to the Father but by me."- John 14:6 "We are of God: he that knows God hears us; he that is not of God does not hear us. That is how we know the spirit of truth, and the spirit of error."- 1 John 4:6 *************** JOHN 16:1-14
The main problem with Eastern Orthodoy is their doctrine of synergism and the denial of original sin. This is the reason why they will never understand Luther's theology and will keep on ranting.
Synergism directly contradicts the Gospel and it doesn't matter if you Orthodox say that you believe faith justifies you. With synergism Christ will never be in the center and you can do every rethorical and mental accrobatics you can think of, it won't change this fact.
What do you mean "Christ will never be in the center"?
We do have freedom and ability to choose to love God and one another,
If there is no free will, then there is no genuine love, nor can there be genuine faith.
The good and the bad you have done in your body is your doing not God doing it, read:
1 Peter 1:17
And if ye call on the Father, who without respect of persons judgeth according to every man’s work, pass the time of your sojourning here in fear:
2 Corinthians 5:10
For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ; that every one may receive the things done in his body, according to that he hath done, whether it be good or bad.
Ah so he chose to go to hell? Got it
Eastern Orthodox- "We don't teach that those who aren't EO go to hell!"
Also Eastern Orthodox- "You chose to be Lutheran? Guess you're going to hell"
I wonder what his answer or thoughts are on the efficacy of relics and sacramentals (especially holy water)?
Has your Reverence considered the Lutheran Church's Byzantine rite?
Im american greek and i never heard you are forced to venerate icons whatt. Even more reason to stay protestant
It's normative but nobody is forced to do it.
What brought you to believing in God from philosophy and Buddhism, etc.?
Isn’t it a little problematic that this man went from evangelical (reformed Baptist), to being an Eastern Orthodox Priest, to back to evangelicalism and being a pastor in the Holiness movement offshoot, to now a Lutheran priest?
indeed
According to his own testimony on Issues Etc, Pr. Schooping went to generic evangelicalism from EO as a temporary landing ground in order to finding a Confessional tradition he could actually call home. In his own words in that interview “The Book of Concord stood head and shoulders above every other reformation confession”. Salvaging one’s faith from the rubble of a heterodox tradition like EO requires time to heal and assess what is true. Evangelicalism is where he originally came from, so it makes sense he would at least temporarily retreat to there before finding a new home. I’d argue if it reflects poorly on anyone, it’s Evangelicalism since they likely always knew his intent was to stay temporarily. Since it look him almost 3 years to become Confessional Lutheran after leaving EO, it actually reflects maturity that he took time to seriously research the different traditions.
@@TheologyVisualized so yeah shame for just having anyone pastor a church but also shame on him no? Start pastoring a church which you don’t know or agree with their tradition and doctrine. You don’t intend to stay.
But its not problematic when ecclesialists do the same?
@tkurzND He did agree with their doctrine insofar as he understood it was more right than EO and familiar given his upbringing. So it reflects more his knowledge of Evangelicalism given his history there. His intention in the CMA was reflective of needing a denomination that wasn’t as doctrinally non-committal as American Evangelicalism, since that was part of what pushed him into EO in the first place. Also, since he has a family to support and a call to pastor, it isn’t out of the question that he would seek employment from a group aligned to his former background while he figured things out. It is potentially frustrating that the CMA would bring on someone whose intention was always temporary, but it can also be viewed as them offering grace to someone pastorally qualified (in their circle) who was harmed by a different tradition, regardless of the tradition. I know that last part sounds like I’m reversing my opinion. The first comment was qualified with “*if* it reflect poorly on anyone…” which doesn’t necessarily mean it does.
Praying to the holy mother and saints is a “waste of time”.
My Gosh. Look at all the miracles. Look at all the healing testimonies.
Lord have mercy on his soul.
He clearly was not very well catechized if Mary being raised in the temple is some scandal to him. It has been celebrated as a feast day for nearly 1500 years and is one of the 12 "great" feasts. To act like any of these ideas are "hidden" from the convert is so ridiculous.
I mean, it might take a long time for someone to learn about all these things, although they should have a year to read and hear all the festal services. But what I'm hearing is two problems. One, the need to systematize everything and have one explanation for how everything "works" as if we could fit God into a model inside our own brains. Two, unwillingness to trust that when you run into something that doesn't seem right to you, the Church is probably right and you're probably wrong, even though you can't see how; and to sit and wrestle with that as long as it takes, even it's years or decades or your entire life.
This is why nobody should join the Church because they think it's correct on some doctrine; they will eventually find some doctrine they think it's wrong about, and leave. If you join the Church because you are convinced it's the Church, then when something poses you difficulty you're going to have to deal with it. The exact image of this is what happens in John 6:60-69.
If we abide in him Christ we cannot sin , going back to the old covenant.
Why would someone leave the church God started for the church Martin Luther invented 1500 years later?
Martin Luther did not invent a church. He studied the Scriptures and the fathers to learn what the historic truth was. Luther never even left the church. Rome broke fellowship (excommunicating Luther). The church that Christ instituted carries on and the Lutherans look to the Scriptures and the fathers to guide them. As we are warned in the new testament, even if an angel from heaven should preach to us a different gospel we should not stray from the truth. So popes and bishops and councils are subject to be judged under the authority of the word of God which is handed down to us in the Scriptures. The fathers, traditions and councils all help us understand those truths, but are still themselves subject to those truths. So this pastor did not "leave the church God started" to join a church "invented" by man, rather he submitted himself to the word of God and humbly listened to it calling him away from the opinions and inventions of men.
@@gladiusdecimus2253 that's objectively false. The lutheran sect didn't exist until Martin luther started it. That's why it's called Lutheranism, and not simply Christianity. There is a reason EVERY church in the Holy Land is Orthodox or Catholic. They received the Faith from the Blessed Mouth of Christ and His Apostles themselves, not some German perv 1500s years later. And it's pretty silly yo claim the Bible when it was the Bishops of the Catholic(both east and west) who gathered in Rome in 381 and told what the books where the Christian scriptures. Leave your fake church and follow the actual Church God started.
@gladiusdecimus2253 that's objectively false. The lutheran sect didn't exist until Martin luther started it. That's why it's called Lutheranism and not simply Christianity. There is a reason EVERY church in the Holy Land is Orthodox or Catholic. The recived the Faith from the Blessed mouth of Christ Himself and His Apostles, not some German perv 1500 years later. And it's funny you claim to follow scripture when it was the Catholic(east and west) Bishops who gathered at Rome in 381 and told you what the Christian scriptures were(all 73 books). The fact that Lutheranism, and every prot sect has female and lesbian pastors(VERY condemned by the scriptures you falsely claim to follow) completey vindicated the truth of the Apostolic Churches. Leave your degenerate sect and follow Christ in His Church.
@@hamie7624That is magnificently erroneous. Lutheranism is the Catholic Church. The Lutherans didn't schism, the Pope did.
What does reformation mean?@@hamie7624
I’m so thankful that Mr Shooping left the Orthodox priesthood and the Orthodox Church. He deserves to have what he desires and be where he feels more comfortable and at home. I only wish he would own the fact that no one forced him into Orthodoxy or the priesthood, those were his decisions that he made for himself as an adult. He’s clearly an intellectual dude, so I wonder why he didn’t figure out before he converted and then pursued ordination that he didn’t want to be Orthodox? Also, why does he devote so much effort to trying to critique Orthodoxy? Why does he hate Orthodixy so much, and go out of his way to attack it?
I can tell you as an Orthodox Christian who actually loves Christ and the Orthodox Church, that Mr Shooping , for all his knowledge about Orthodox elements, understands nothing of Orthodoxy. I feel sorry for people who are misguided by his sophistry and think they are getting truth from him.
I’m not going to take the time to try to point out his errors… there are so many in every minute that he speaks. I just read the Epistke reading for tomorrow which is 2 Timothy which says do not get into useless disputes , so I won’t.
Suffice it to say that Mr Shooping’s approach to Orthodoxy is akin to Bart Erman’s approach to the Gospel. He can talk about it for years and write thousands of learned pages about it and yet… he understands it not.
So that’s what you’re getting from Mr. Shooping on Orthodoxy.
what isn't useless is you actually responding to Pastor Shooping especially when you wrote such a long comment.
@@Observer-g6m So you're just resorting to vague generalities and ad hominems instead of logical refutation?
Truly the signs of a winning argument.
@@javierperd2604Exactly
Yes! Yes! Yes!
So early chapters aren't up yet
This comment genuinely helped me to realize that I forgot to add chapters. Just added them now.
Thank you!
Whether it's one year or two or ten or twenty lived within the Church, apostasy is still apostasy. Josh: come back to your senses.
Respectfully, what church will he jump to next?
Roman Catholic. Almost certain.
@@EricAlHarbNo, he’s already done the whole “one true church” rodeo. If you bothered to listen to the video, he left the Orthodox Church for the the C&MA so he could study the Protestant confessions while being in a community that supported his understanding of the Gospel.
@ lol right jesus formed 35,000 churches. I get it.
The blessed virgin Mary and the communion of the Saints, wonderful helpers and intercesors. This poor fellow remains afflicted by Luthers limiting and narrowing. He needs our prayers.
💯🔥☦️
What substance did Jesus Christ infallibly instruct you that the Eucharist is in order for you to be infallibly correct what substance the Eucharist is? Protestant (except Lutheran) = substance of bread and wine. Lutheran = substance of bread and wine and the substance of Jesus Christ's flesh and blood at the same time. Catholic and Orthodox = substance of Jesus Christ's flesh and blood.
Technically Lutherans say it's a mystery referred to as both bread and cup/wine as well as Body and Blood by the Scriptures and Fathers.
Also, the Roman Catholics in Australia made it clear that they don't believe the bread and wine are annihilated as they have been accused of by the Lutherans.
That said, do you know if the Catholic and Orthodox teach that the remnants of Christ's Most Holy Body and Blood pass through the digestive system and are expelled?
That would be abhorrent to the Lutheran, who is able to say that Christ's Body and Blood consume the communicant and the remnants of the bread and wine are passed.
Very fascinating Story. I appreciate Mr. Schooping opening up to the viewers and baring his soul. It's very hard to be EO in America as the culture and mindset can be/become too vast a chasm to bridge.
I don't get how you can possibly make videos promoting christians going from a denomination different than yours, to another denomination still different than yours.
You just have a bias against apostolic churches and assumes all churches that aren't apostolic are equally valid. But how is that possible, if they teach conflating things ? If you're not sure which one of them is correct, how can you know that the apostolic churches aren't correct either ?
One can't call a line crooked unless he knows what a straight line is.
It doesn't make sense this collective allegiance for all protestant denominations (that support the trinity, not even the nicene creed as a whole is required, aka baptists). If any church can be wrong in salvation related doctrines like if Baptism saves or not, how can the apostolic churches be wrong if their difference to lutheranism for example is in the believe of Sola Fide ? If lutherans are right, catholics who trust in faith and works for their salvation are still being saved by faith alone, but baptist who deny the sacraments are going to Hell. That's why Luther urged the german princes in the Holy Roman Empire to kill the anabaptists and not the priests, because denying the sacraments was a matter of life and death, not the indulgences.
One of the more interesting conversations about Orthodoxy and Protestantism I've heard.
For confessional Lutherans beset by the claims of Eastern Orthodoxy or Rome: ruclips.net/video/9m4PEW6Ol-c/видео.html
Thank you for explaining the orthodox church. Thank you for making it clear that venerating Mary and the Saints is worship, I have always thought this was worship, but others kept denying it. I also am grateful that you get into the very early church father's and that our LCMS Lutheran does agree with the early church fathers. Thanks for making the message about salvation through Christ alone, through faith alone.
The Bible is so clear on PSA, anyone who denies it is in error.
Nothing to do with theology. Jesus said you must be born again.
Next year.. Lutheran Priest CONVERTS to Buddhism
Your only arguments
As followers of Christ, I pray you repent for this.
@@AnglicanCuriosity What is there to repent from? It was a joke based on the sillyness of changing denominations that much. Might as well change religions
Hesychasm is nearly Buddhist. So he’s already been there lol
@@Thatoneguy-pu8ty Nah hes going fully Roman Catholic next, Lutheran - > Anglican - > Anglo Catholic - > Roman Catholic.
When it comes to the filioque he's just plain lying by omission. He paraphrases St. Gregory of Nyssa but this paraphrase does *not* equate to the heretical understanding of the filioque (that was later dogmatized in the fallen West at Lyons and Ferrara/Florence.) One *could* read it that way, just like one *can* interpret Scripture falsely. Schooping omits that the Popes not just did not adopt it but refused to do so until the 11th century. And that the filioque wasn't universally adopted in the West even after the schism. Yes, the history of the filioque is more complex than often taught (as is the case with virtually everything) but that doesn't mean the Orthodox view of the filioque history is incorrect. Not everybody has studied the intricacies of everything, and that's true pretty much universally.
Your disrespect for Mary is appalling. And so is your total lack of understanding of what it means to have devotion to Mary. Yes, Rome goes too far and sometimes the East too. But I practice advocation of the saints, simply asking them to pray for us. I often do that by asking God to bless me through their advocation.
Why is Schooping still wearing an Orthodox beard?
A lot of Lutheran pastors have beards.
Sad. He speaks as if he is an authority on Church history, theology etc yet he makes several false claims here. He is blind to his ignorance and misleads others.
If you allege "false claims", you must state what you think they are.
When you just can't ditch Augustine
We are to follow Augustine as is commanded by the early church, unlike the EO who oddly hate on him despite claiming to have the consensus Patrum and holding fast to the practices of the fathers of the early church.
"We further declare that we hold fast to the decrees of the four Councils, and in every way follow the holy Fathers, Athanasius, Hilary, Basil, Gregory the Theologian, Gregory of Nyssa, Ambrose, Theophilus, John (Chrysostom) of Constantinople, Cyril, *Augustine* , Proclus, Leo and their writings on the true faith."
2nd Council of Constantinople, 553
The East could use Augustine, as Fr. Seraphim Rose recognized.
@Thatoneguy-pu8ty it was a silly comment of mine; and not a very clear one. Of course the early Fathers in both East and West should be drawn from; and it's true that some modernist Orthodox have a very imbalanced and ridiculous view of Augustine and forget his many great contributions. (I'm not Orthodox). I was thinking more along the lines of his views on predestination, which are kind of in our 'mother's milk' within Western Christian circles of many types.
I guess if you think some variation of Augustinian monergism (at least in regards initial justification) is essential because he somehow brought clarity to the muddied thought of the first four centuries, then fair enough. I don't personally. I'm persuaded - Scripturally, Traditionally, Philosophically and Logically - of the reverse: somewhat muddying a general and already existing consensus relating to election and perseverance.
Anyway, blah blah blah, if I had to choose a Western tradition, it would be Lutheranism: escaping both the extremes of Calvinism and the delusional aspects of Charismania ; )
Peace in Christ!
@@emilesturt3377 Well, I'm glad you've clarified. If anyone knew anything about the Lutheran Fathers, they would realize how broadly they drew, from both East and West, in their theological thought and writing.
If you're not Orthodox, what are you?
@@emilesturt3377 In case no one knows, Augustine is a saint in the Orthodox Church.
He wanted a softer easier way.
"my yoke is easy, and my burden is light"
"The traditions of man make the word of God of none effect"
@ Matthew 7:13-14 "Enter by the narrow gate; for wide is the gate and broad is the way that leads to destruction, and there are many who go in by it. [14] Because narrow is the gate and difficult is the way which leads to life, and there are few who find it.
you're coping.
@@billkanelopoulos7165 so we agree, since Jesus was speaking of himself. 🙂
(Matthew 18:20) "For where two or three gather in my name, there am I with them.”
You gotta format your videos to not reveal everything so immediately. I was able to figure out the question posed in the title immediately. He's an eccuminist. Mystery solved.
This guy converted again? Wow
de-converted. In other words, apostasy.
You really are misleading people. You left the True Church. You threw away the pearl of price for Protestantism. So sad.
his catechism should have been the full 3 years and he should have never even been considered to be a priest.
Orthodoxy doesn't teach that we're saved by piling up our works to reach heaven. It teaches that we are saved by faith, and that our faith consists of what we do, not what we say.
There is no functional difference between faith and works. Profession of a belief without the corresponding action is just hypocrisy. On the other hand, if you're doing what God commands then you are, by definition, obeying his commandments -- whether you know it or not. ("For when Gentiles, who do not have the law, by nature do what the law requires, they are a law to themselves..." - Romans 2:14-15)
Protestant soteriology separating faith from works, and defining faith as rational assent to a set of beliefs, would tend to force them to conclude that an atheist or Muslim or Buddhist who practiced many Christian virtues in life, and even died to save the life of another, is burning in hell just because he doesn't assent to the fact that Jesus is the Son of God (whatever that means) and died to save him from his sins (whatever that means).
Most Protestants intuitively feel this is wrong, but would have a hard time finding a place to fit that intuition into their theology. Orthodox theology doesn't force such a conclusion though, because it sees faith in actions. This means someone can worship what they do not know and be saved (John 4:22) or call out to Jesus as "Lord, Lord" and still be sent away (Matthew 7:21). One relief of this is that we don't have to live in fear that if we fail to evangelize someone, God can't save them due to our failure. God can do whatever he wants, he's God.
Correct me if I'm misunderstanding you, but it sounds like you believe the following:
True faith is performance of good works. Believing and trusting that Christ has died on the cross for your sins does not save your, rather, the acting out of the Christian life saves you. A musslim or Budhist, if they do good works, are going to heaven without trust in Christ.
@@gladiusdecimus2253 It seems clear to me that doing good works alone is closer to true faith than a profession of belief alone.
I can't speak to who is going to heaven or not, but I can say that God loves Muslims and Buddhists, and will save them if they are willing. The problem with following a false religion though, is that it might turn you into the kind of person who isn't willing to turn to God and be saved.
On the other hand, even Islam and Buddhism as they are practiced today have been influenced quite a bit by Christianity. This is part of what Christ predicted, that he would "draw all men to Myself." Revelation shows all the kings of the earth coming to offer tribute to Christ, that suggests an even wider net pulling in more kinds of branches to graft onto the olive tree than we may imagine.
Faith is defined as having three parts, attention, assent and trust. For the Lutheran trust is the focus, if one trusts another's words then they live by them; "Christ was conceived through the Blessed Virgin's ear" yet sin was crouching at Cain's door speaking murder. put another way, trust necessitates action.
A Muslim, Buddhist or Christian who trust a different spirit to the Holy Spirit do the work of the other spirit, they will the will of the other spirit (that is the will is bound to the one who is heard), they receive the reward of the other spirit; it's just the reward of unclean spirits is death. Melchizedek, Rahab, and Ruth put their trust in the Holy Spirit, despite potential lack of understanding, and by all accounts they live. The Holy Spirit isn't bound to only speak through the Scriptures and Sacraments, yet He has promised Himself fully there.
I don't know where you're getting your queer ideas about Protestant soteriology, it's certainly not from any Lutheran sources I know.
Dude cant make his mind up
ruclips.net/video/Ft4p2h6fTOM/видео.htmlsi=Vxlb4yA0dMYySFBA