Some folks seem to take Jon's question to assumes that total numbers of Evangelicals are declining. I don't know if that's the case or not, and didn't take that to be an assumption in his question. There can be a discernible exit of some, while total numbers are increasing. Pentecostal numbers are have reportedly been on the rise for several decades, but I don't technically include them as Evangelicals.
If anyone thinks that it is "incontestable" that icon veneration is an accretion should watch Seraphim Hamilton and Michael Garten's responses to Dr. Ortlund.
We shouldn't credit the second great awakening because it was anything but that. you can look at the fruit that was not produced from it and the church in the US today still suffers from it.
Drive through Bethesda, Md and you will see a rainbow flag in front of over half the Protestant Churches, it is now a religion that will reflect society rather than try to influence society. I recently converted to Catholicism because it it based, unchanged much since its creation in 32 AD.
@@jonherreramedia constantly misrepresents what the Pope said. Catholic teaching has always been consistent in loving the sinner and hating the sin. Homosexuals are our brothers and sisters in Christ. Homosexual acts meanwhile remain to be a sin. Pope Francis never changed Catholic teaching.
...because Evangelicalism is largely modernist innovation, shallow theologically, and largely entertainment...I'm a primitivist (churches of Christ)...
Sadly, Churches of Christ (Stone-Cambell) are not really an exception. They are somewhat the poster children for anti-creedal Evangelicalism. If, ironically, the average member's theology is more orthodox than the typical Evangelical, I'd be happy to hear it. But that's not my impression.
@@reformational ..churches of Christ (Stone-Campbell) are definitely non-creedal...yet are trinitarian..but not Evangelical (ugh!), which is basically "sinner's prayer"/"rock-n-roll Church", and has no interest in ancient "orthodox" christianity, whatsoever ...rejecting acapella worship, weekly communion, or baptismal regeneration...at the same time many popular Church of Christ Preachers are quasi-(want to be) evangelicals- Mack Lucado is an example...whereas the congregation I preach at, is devoted to primitivism...we even celebrate "the Love Feast" (Jude 12)...simple Christianity, from before the Creeds...and I use the Early fathers as an additional source material..
"Why are fleeing Evangelicalism" ??? Really ? If that is true, why are people packing the parking lots of the Evangelical churches near me ?, loaded with former Roman Catholics. I'm an Anglican and we have a tiny church loosing/fleeing to the Evangelical Churches. In my experience, the Evangelicals are booming. They even built a new church in a neighboring town to start a new plant church.
@roddumlauf9241 I don't know what the exact reported numbers are (if anyone has them). I'm sure there are *many* places where mega entertainment type "churches" do quite well, and are full of "ex- Roman Catholics." When @jonherrera asked the question, I had in mind a trend among "theologically interested" Evangelicals that began (to my understanding) some 40 years ago, and hasn't slowed down. Perhaps not reflective of total numbers, but from a recent article: "according to a recent report by the Orthodox Studies Institute, Eastern Orthodoxy in the US has seen an increase in conversions over the past several years, with most of the converts from a Protestant background (65%) citing theological reasons for converting (60%)." Protestant here could mean, confessional and liturgical (actual-) Protestant traditions, but I expect it means (mostly) Evangelicals. That's my impression anyway.
Roman Catholics leave and become Evangelicals. Evangelicals leave and become atheist apathetic. It's just a general decline in America. However there us a growing movement of thinkers subversive to the cultural religion who are moving in the opposite direction. I think it's likely this will filter to the general populace in the next 20-30 years.
@reformational don't want to argue with you but even Gavin says icons existed in the first century onward, he just claims that there are no preserved texts that describe christians bowing before them and kissing them.
@@seeker3599 , that's right. The issue is not the existence of pictures, but of icon veneration. Icon veneration is *clearly* an accretion. That's the issue. The icon-venerating traditions don't have a leg to stand on.
@@reformational we all venerate icons, maybe not portraits on wood, but all Christians honor images. It was the image of a serpent elevated above all the Israelites that healed them in the wilderness, the image of the cross that blessed Jacob, the image of the cross that conquered amalek. The old testament itself is an icon of the new, and as some early Christian fathers put it, the new is an image of the age to come. Creation itself reflects the glory of God so that His invisible attributes are clearly seen--all creation images Him. What portrait images are with wood and color the Bible is with letters and ink. Both are images trying to reveal the divine. Most evangelicals take very seriously how the scriptures are treated, putting nothing on top of it and treating it as sacred. Mankind is icon, created by God in His image. Jesus Himself is called by St Paul "the express image of [the Father's] person". In fact, the only way to the Father is through His express image or icon. "No one has seen God at anytime, [Jesus] has declared Him". This is precisely what the 7th ecumenical council was about. It wasn't about if there were writings from the 2nd century providing an instruction manual on how to venerate a portrait image, but to declare the theology that God has appeared as man, and as such, now, we have His express image. You may, as Gavin does, disagree with specifics, but to deny the theology of icons is to deny that the one "which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon, that which our hands have handled" 1 John came in the flesh and can be depicted. If Gavin or you or anyone else does not deny this theology and just wants historical archeological evidence from the 1st or 2nd century for every Christian practice and belief, then sola fida, sola scriptural, the New testament canon, the entire evangelical movement and every Christian church besides Orthodox, Catholic, and oriental, must also be seen as accretions. The formulation of the Trinity most churches use today is not from a 1st century text. If you are against icons a consistent view would have you not wear a cross around your neck or kiss the Bible
@@seeker3599 , no. We do NOT all venerate icons. I do not wear or otherwise display crosses, nor do I kiss the Bible. The icon-venerating traditions are all guilty of Mark 7.9
What is false are the claims being made in this video. The fastest growing Christian group since the 90s is pentecostal/charismatic. Orthodox churches have been bleeding members for years.
@@jefffrazier2465 --- Just because, "the fastest growing Christian group since the 90s is pentecostal/charismatic" might be true, that doesn't mean "people are fleeing Evangelicalism" isn't also true.
@gordon3186 there's no "might be true" about it. Google it for yourself. And yes, both are true. If those fleeing traditional Protestant churches were mostly going to the RCC, then it would be the growing church benefitting from the defectors, not pentecostals.
![SahBabii - Viking [Official Music Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/D37cL92JX0I/mqdefault.jpg)
Some folks seem to take Jon's question to assumes that total numbers of Evangelicals are declining. I don't know if that's the case or not, and didn't take that to be an assumption in his question. There can be a discernible exit of some, while total numbers are increasing. Pentecostal numbers are have reportedly been on the rise for several decades, but I don't technically include them as Evangelicals.
Its always hard to guage what content is going to get the most engagement. Its never the ones that you think its going to be. This is one of them.
If anyone thinks that it is "incontestable" that icon veneration is an accretion should watch Seraphim Hamilton and Michael Garten's responses to Dr. Ortlund.
Those responses are completely unconvincing. However I am aware of a doco coming out which looks like it may have some good arguments
would you mind taking a moment to unpack your stance here?
We shouldn't credit the second great awakening because it was anything but that. you can look at the fruit that was not produced from it and the church in the US today still suffers from it.
Drive through Bethesda, Md and you will see a rainbow flag in front of over half the Protestant Churches, it is now a religion that will reflect society rather than try to influence society. I recently converted to Catholicism because it it based, unchanged much since its creation in 32 AD.
So you're at odds with the pope then?
@@jonherreramedia constantly misrepresents what the Pope said. Catholic teaching has always been consistent in loving the sinner and hating the sin. Homosexuals are our brothers and sisters in Christ. Homosexual acts meanwhile remain to be a sin. Pope Francis never changed Catholic teaching.
@@manwhale3398 your mom is consistently at odds with the historic teachings of the catholic church, that's not an opinion, that's an obvious fact.
evangelicals have used a catholic book the bible to create their own modern religion
The Bible is the Bible, it is not a catholic book.
Would be worth addressing the claims you’re making with substantive argument and not just assertion if you want to influence peoples perspective
This is just a clip of a longer episode.
@@jonherrera Where’s the full episode? I didn’t see it linked anywhere.
@@joelrobertsonmusic ruclips.net/video/aFW16O1Rbd4/видео.htmlsi=NlLzpq0HoLdZLgf4
@@joelrobertsonmusic ruclips.net/video/aFW16O1Rbd4/видео.htmlsi=Tw_55IwozbAkAH60
...because Evangelicalism is largely modernist innovation, shallow theologically, and largely entertainment...I'm a primitivist (churches of Christ)...
Sadly, Churches of Christ (Stone-Cambell) are not really an exception. They are somewhat the poster children for anti-creedal Evangelicalism. If, ironically, the average member's theology is more orthodox than the typical Evangelical, I'd be happy to hear it. But that's not my impression.
@@reformational ..churches of Christ (Stone-Campbell) are definitely non-creedal...yet are trinitarian..but not Evangelical (ugh!), which is basically "sinner's prayer"/"rock-n-roll Church", and has no interest in ancient "orthodox" christianity, whatsoever ...rejecting acapella worship, weekly communion, or baptismal regeneration...at the same time many popular Church of Christ Preachers are quasi-(want to be) evangelicals- Mack Lucado is an example...whereas the congregation I preach at, is devoted to primitivism...we even celebrate "the Love Feast" (Jude 12)...simple Christianity, from before the Creeds...and I use the Early fathers as an additional source material..
"Why are fleeing Evangelicalism" ??? Really ? If that is true, why are people packing the parking lots of the Evangelical churches near me ?, loaded with former Roman Catholics. I'm an Anglican and we have a tiny church loosing/fleeing to the Evangelical Churches. In my experience, the Evangelicals are booming. They even built a new church in a neighboring town to start a new plant church.
What you're talking about is, at best, anecdotal. The evangelical church has been dying for years. There data is clear on this.
@roddumlauf9241 I don't know what the exact reported numbers are (if anyone has them). I'm sure there are *many* places where mega entertainment type "churches" do quite well, and are full of "ex- Roman Catholics." When @jonherrera asked the question, I had in mind a trend among "theologically interested" Evangelicals that began (to my understanding) some 40 years ago, and hasn't slowed down.
Perhaps not reflective of total numbers, but from a recent article: "according to a recent report by the Orthodox Studies Institute, Eastern Orthodoxy in the US has seen an increase in conversions over the past several years, with most of the converts from a Protestant background (65%) citing theological reasons for converting (60%)." Protestant here could mean, confessional and liturgical (actual-) Protestant traditions, but I expect it means (mostly) Evangelicals.
That's my impression anyway.
A really good book to read on this is The Great Evangelical Recession.
Roman Catholics leave and become Evangelicals. Evangelicals leave and become atheist apathetic. It's just a general decline in America. However there us a growing movement of thinkers subversive to the cultural religion who are moving in the opposite direction. I think it's likely this will filter to the general populace in the next 20-30 years.
there's literally been icons in every century from the 1st on. Maybe look into that.
nope. Do your homework. @TruthUnites video entitled "Icon Veneration is CLEARLY an Accretion!" for a start.
@reformational don't want to argue with you but even Gavin says icons existed in the first century onward, he just claims that there are no preserved texts that describe christians bowing before them and kissing them.
@@seeker3599 , that's right. The issue is not the existence of pictures, but of icon veneration. Icon veneration is *clearly* an accretion. That's the issue. The icon-venerating traditions don't have a leg to stand on.
@@reformational we all venerate icons, maybe not portraits on wood, but all Christians honor images. It was the image of a serpent elevated above all the Israelites that healed them in the wilderness, the image of the cross that blessed Jacob, the image of the cross that conquered amalek.
The old testament itself is an icon of the new, and as some early Christian fathers put it, the new is an image of the age to come.
Creation itself reflects the glory of God so that His invisible attributes are clearly seen--all creation images Him.
What portrait images are with wood and color the Bible is with letters and ink. Both are images trying to reveal the divine. Most evangelicals take very seriously how the scriptures are treated, putting nothing on top of it and treating it as sacred.
Mankind is icon, created by God in His image.
Jesus Himself is called by St Paul "the express image of [the Father's] person". In fact, the only way to the Father is through His express image or icon. "No one has seen God at anytime, [Jesus] has declared Him".
This is precisely what the 7th ecumenical council was about. It wasn't about if there were writings from the 2nd century providing an instruction manual on how to venerate a portrait image, but to declare the theology that God has appeared as man, and as such, now, we have His express image.
You may, as Gavin does, disagree with specifics, but to deny the theology of icons is to deny that the one "which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon, that which our hands have handled" 1 John came in the flesh and can be depicted.
If Gavin or you or anyone else does not deny this theology and just wants historical archeological evidence from the 1st or 2nd century for every Christian practice and belief, then sola fida, sola scriptural, the New testament canon, the entire evangelical movement and every Christian church besides Orthodox, Catholic, and oriental, must also be seen as accretions. The formulation of the Trinity most churches use today is not from a 1st century text. If you are against icons a consistent view would have you not wear a cross around your neck or kiss the Bible
@@seeker3599 , no. We do NOT all venerate icons. I do not wear or otherwise display crosses, nor do I kiss the Bible.
The icon-venerating traditions are all guilty of Mark 7.9
For the same reason people are leaving islam. It is false.
What is false are the claims being made in this video. The fastest growing Christian group since the 90s is pentecostal/charismatic. Orthodox churches have been bleeding members for years.
@@jefffrazier2465 --- Just because, "the fastest growing Christian group since the 90s is pentecostal/charismatic" might be true, that doesn't mean "people are fleeing Evangelicalism" isn't also true.
kkk
@gordon3186 there's no "might be true" about it. Google it for yourself. And yes, both are true. If those fleeing traditional Protestant churches were mostly going to the RCC, then it would be the growing church benefitting from the defectors, not pentecostals.
@@jefffrazier2465 , I wasn't really including the Pentecostals (speaking of heretics). Had I thought about it, I would have made that distinction.