An Anabaptist Perspective on Church History (w/ David Bercot)
Рет қаралды 13,361
2 жыл бұрынThis video is sponsored by Faithful Counseling. For 10% off your first month, use the link, www.faithfulcounseling.com/gos...
In this video I'm joined by David Bercot, an Anabaptist Church Historian, pastor, and writer who seeks to share the teachings, and even more so, the lifestyle, of the Early Church. After investigating church history, David went on a long journey from his Bible church, through the Anglican Church, and eventually into Anabaptist churches. While many studies of Church History focus on theology, Bercot has spent his career focusing on the lifestyle of the Early Church, and I think you'll find this perspective really interesting.
Check out David Bercot's Work:
www.scrollpublishing.com
/ @soundfaithchannel
Support Gospel Simplicity:
Patreon: / gospelsimplicity
One Time Donation: www.paypal.me/gospelsimplicity
Merch: gospelsimplicity.creator-spring
Follow Gospel Simplicity on Social Media:
Facebook: / gospelsimplicity
Instagram: / gospelsimpli. .
Twitter: / gsplsimplicity
About our sponsor:
KINDRED exists to encourage more acts of faith. We believe this begins with reclaiming sacred time for God in our daily life. KINDRED Bibles are a beautiful presentation of the biblical books. Sacred scripture is preserved and composed in an approachable and engaging format to support daily prayer, reflection and discernment. Whether you are discovering scripture for the first time or rediscovering it for the 100th time, the time spent with God is time well spent. We invite you to encounter the Bible in a reflective new way. We invite you to experience The Word renewed.
Use promo code GOSPEL10 for 10% off your KINDRED order at: www.kindredapostle.com/
Watch my review of KINDRED’s The Gospel According to Mark at: bit.ly/3rbbhP8
About Gospel Simplicity:
Gospel Simplicity began as a KZfaq channel in a Moody Bible Institute dorm. It was born out of the central conviction that the gospel is really good news, and I wanted to share that with as many people as possible. The channel has grown and changed over time, but that central conviction has never changed. Today, we make content around biblical and theological topics, often interacting with people from across the Christian tradition with the hope of seeking greater unity and introducing people to the beautiful simplicity and transformative power of the gospel, the good news about Jesus.
About the host:
Hey! My name is Austin, and I'm a 22 year old guy who’s passionate about the beautiful simplicity and transformative power of the gospel. I believe that the gospel, the good news about Jesus, is really good news, and I’m out to explore, unpack, and share that good news with as many people as possible. I'm a full blown Bible and Church History nerd that loves getting to dialogue with others about this, learning as much as I can, and then teaching whatever I can. I grew up around Frederick, MD where I eventually ended up working my first job at a church. They made the mistake of letting me try my hand at teaching, and instantly I fell in love. That set me on a path for further education, and I'm currently a student at Moody Bible Institute in Chicago, IL, studying theology. On any given day you can find me with my nose in a book or a guitar in my hands. Want to get to know me more? Follow me and say hi on Instagram at: @austin.suggs
Video Stuff:
Camera: Sony a6300
Lens: Sigma 16mm F1.4 amzn.to/2MjssPB
Edited in FCPX
Music:
Bowmans Root - Isaac Joel
*Links in the description may include affiliate links in which I receive a small commission of any purchases you make using that link.
@GospelSimplicity 2 жыл бұрын
This video is sponsored by Faithful Counseling. For 10% off your first month, use the link, www.faithfulcounseling.com/gospelsimplicity.
@seen1389 2 жыл бұрын
⛔⛔⛔⛔⛔⛔⛔⛔⛔⛔⛔⛔⛔⛔ AS A CATHOLIC I WANT THE WHOLE CATHOLIC WORLD TO KNOW THE FOLLOWING: LEBANON TODAY BECAUSE OF ISRAEL ie USA AND ITS ALLY REAL ALLY iran backed HIZBOLLAH which jointly occupy Lebanon with the USA. IS BEING DESTROYED .MAINLY THOSE 2 WERE BEHIND THE BEIRUT EXPLOSION , the massacre and the region destroyed Is 98% CATHOLIC. NOW THEY ARE THROWING THE LEBANESE BOTH MUSLIM AND CHRISTIAN CATHOLIC MARONITE IN HELL.THEY CUT THE ELECTRICITY , THE SUBSTITUTE PRIVATE GENERATORS ARE DEPRIVED FROM FUEL ON PURPOSE , WE ARE LIVING IN TOTAL DARKNESS , except for few. privileged. THOSE DEMONIC POWERS CREATED A EXTREMELY SEVERE ECONOMIC CRISIS UNHEARD OF BEFORE , THEY MADE THE LOCAL CURRENCY LOSE 90% OF ITS VALUE, BLOCKED THE ACCESS TO PEOPLE BANK ACCOUNT, WE ARE LITTERARY DYING ! .LEBANON HAVE THE BIGGEST CATHOLIC COMMUNITY IN THE MIDDLE EAST. ALL THESE CRIMES ARE MADE BY THE USA. WE WILL NOT SHUT UP , WE WANT THE CATHOLIC WORLD TO KNOW WHAT YOUR COUNTRY IS DOING WITH ITS MISLIM ACCOMPLICES TO A WHOLE POPULATION FOR ISRAEL SAKE.
@seen1389 2 жыл бұрын
🎯🎯🎯🎯You can also read the following article : Why NETANYAHU think America is stupid
@divinityofblackness6330 5 ай бұрын
I appreciate David Bercot's take on the church fathers. He certainly ruffles the feathers of Protestants and Cathlodoxy alike. He has a more neutral position which (for me, at least) is very helpful. His methodology of reading the early church writings comes from his experience as a lawyer.
@andrewschiffer4323 2 ай бұрын
He ruffles Christian feathers because he repeats a repackaged Jehovah's witness tactic, from where he comes, where he sows the seeds of doubt and seeks to create divisions like the JW's do. He believes that you have to be baptized to received the spirit, like Jehovah Witnesses, works are necessary for salvation like JW's, he hates the reformation like the JW's although he calls himself a Anabaptist. He is not a Anabaptist but uses it to mislead naive people to accepting doctrines of devils.
@MBFModernHomesteading 5 ай бұрын
Really enjoyed this talk with David Bercot.
@ismailaeyoussef 2 жыл бұрын
A lot of the comments are very unfair to your guest. I don’t agree with everything he stands for, I still respect him and believe the Holy Spirit moving through both of you. Remember guys, Christ tells us to be the light of the world, let us live out His light :)
@GospelSimplicity 2 жыл бұрын
I really appreciate this
@mostreal907 2 жыл бұрын
I don’t read the comments anymore in theological channels. I know the comment section is not the majority of people. But still good to avoid.
@stealthspoon1 2 жыл бұрын
Lifestyle over theology, I love it!
@andrewpower3974 2 жыл бұрын
As someone who has followed Bercot's work for almost a decade & has also read the entire Ante-Nicene Fathers set, I deeply empathize with Bercot's struggle with historic institutional churches. I'm very much a team player & have attended an Orthodox Church weekly for 4+ years but haven't yet converted because it is still very hard for me to reconcile the earliest centuries of the church with something like the Orthodox Church. If any Orthodox folks know of some good resources on why the Church seems to have shifted positions on things like violence, politics, remarriage, wealth, Mary, etc., I'd appreciate it! I definitely believe in progressive revelation/ecumenical consensus to an extent & I don't assume that all change is bad, but I haven't yet heard compelling enough reasons on why these teachings shifted. Thanks!
@glorytogodforallthings8448 2 жыл бұрын
Pray more and God will give you discernment in your journey🙏❤️
@wartimemodels 2 жыл бұрын
Have you read the new book by Fr. Stephen de Young "The Religion of the Apostles"? I don't think the teachings have shifted perhaps as much as you're suggesting, but hard to go down that rabbit hole in KZfaq comments. If you haven't read both of Kallistos Ware's book (Orthodox Church and Orthodox Way), then I recommend that as well. For context, I'm a 42 year old Orthodox who converted from Presbyterianism in 2001 and had some of the same concerns you did (Mary, e.g.). Like many, I got into Greek, the Fathers, etc. and "read my way" into the Church. Nothing wrong with that, but I would also recommend cultivating an Orthodoxy of the heart. Ultimately, it's the reality of Christ and His Resurrection that matters, and the transformation and salvation of the person. The issues are important (and I understand trying to drill down on those as evidence of the "true" Church) but the impulse to satisfy our own intellect before we will obey and be in communion with Body of Christ is bound up in pride, and peculiarly modern in the sense that it's only possible because of the vast amount of information at our fingertips. See, St. Paul, and every Disciple. Christ Himself never wrote a word, and Pentecost wasn't the deliver of the Bible to the Apostles. Books are a huge gift, but they're tools. Every great conversion story involves the heart. The mind ultimately follows. That said, if you have a specific issue you'd like to discuss, I'll see if I can point you to more information to fill in the gaps. I'm not claiming to be an expert, but I have been where you are myself and may be able to be helpful.
@andrewpower3974 2 жыл бұрын
@@wartimemodels Thank you for the thoughtful response! I have read both of those Kallistos Ware books & greatly appreciated them, but not the Religion of the Apostles. I'll have to check it out! Ironically, my biggest hang-ups with Orthodoxy aren't the usual ones like icons or Mary or Scripture+Tradition but more the lifestyle teachings, & it seems that most Orthodox apologists focus on those more commonly asked questions. Just to name one big specific example that seems very clear to me, though I could be wrong, but as far as I'm aware, no Christian used the power of the sword until the 4th century, & not only that, but quite literally EVERY ante-Nicene writer who brings up the subject of violence condemns it wholesale, including the canons of the Nicene Council. My local priest said that in Orthodoxy, killing is always a sin, even in war, which is why all soldiers have to do penance, but the Church allows military force because the world is too messy to forbid violence entirely. That's a tough answer for me to accept. Do you know of any resources that go more in-depth on that topic & perhaps reconcile these seeming shifts?
@AccordingtoJohn 2 жыл бұрын
@@andrewpower3974 Hi! I just happened to read your comment and I don't want to say a lot but here are some thoughts: We know that the same person that appears to the Israelites is the same person that becomes incarnate. So we could say that Christ actually does even order some wars to be done (for some specific reasons but still). If you are thinking that Christianity in its core is pacifist I think that is wrong since the sins of the world are such that unfortunately sometimes defence is the right thing to do, for example, if someone is attacking your infant or your country. The fact that up to the 4th century Christians didn't use the power of the sword is of course true but this is not a complete picture since they didn't use the sword, not because they were in charge of the empire but because they were not. But remember, that even if you kill by accident a person you can not become a priest. That is to say, to kill a person, even in defence or accident is a tragedy. So I do think the Orthodox Church is continuing the tradition you are searching for. Yet it sees the problems of the world and in its pastoral care, it tries to heal a broken world. I have also a problem with the idea that the early church (the first 3 centuries) are somewhat holier than the other centuries. They have a unique value in some sense but the Holy Spirit never left the Church and He is equipping the Church to deal with the challenges of its time. The Church is as much the Body of Christ in the fifth century as in the first three. I am not sure what you mean with that the Orthodox have changed? In dogma, morals, Church structure and so on it has not changed. But people sometimes misunderstand this. If I say that the Bible teaches the same thing from the first book to the last, that it does not contradict itself and so on, that does not mean that one of its books isn't pointing out something that another book doesn't. There are still historical circumstances, different theological points that are drawn out and so on. In the same way that we can say that the four gospels teach the same thing in dogma, morals etc, we can say that the Orthodox Church has always taught the same. When Paul uses Abraham to give an example of salvation through faith but James uses the same example but to point out that Abraham was saved through works, we Christians recognise that this is not a contradiction but different emphases. In the same way, sometimes the Fathers seem to contradict when they do not and when one or two Fathers have an opinion on an issue that is not shared by the Church, we listen to the Church. No single individual is infallible. The Church as a whole is though, so we look for the consensus. I could say more but I don't want to bore you :) I hope this is helpful and thank you for the interaction. John
@wartimemodels 2 жыл бұрын
@@GS-cj7rf Brother, respectfully, you’re making up your own reality here, based on your own limited understanding of things you read in translation. I’m sure it was all some with sincerity, and I don’t doubt your intellect, but this is something o could’ve written 20 years ago and have seen many young men say/write many times. Christ established an actual church at Pentecost, His Bride, and the promise is that the gates of hell shall not prevail against Her. The apostles clearly understood it as an actual church, with bishops (2 Timothy), sacraments, and communal worship. If that church no longer exists (and no, it isn’t “invisible”) then…well, that’s a serious statement and good a reason not to be able to rely on the canon established by that church, and it destroys the legacy of those first apostles. And let’s not make a straw man here. No one is saying that things never change at all. Obviously through the ecumenical councils major debates were settled. There’s a rich body of theological, contemplative, hagiographic and other works that explore and flesh things out even up to the present day. The church has to respond to new challenges as the world changes. “Faith alone” only appears once in scripture, in James, and expressly says that you ARE NOT saved by faith alone. The concepts you’re touching on are partially true, but suffer from the Protestant (and perhaps human) impulse to throw up one’s hands in the face of ambiguity and reduce everything to one or two generic statements that aren’t untrue in and of themselves, but (1) beg the question (what does it mean to “trust His promises” or “live the faith”?) and (2) miss the fullness of the faith. Sure, we can sum up the distance faith as “believe in Jesus, love God and love your neighbor” but if that was really all their was them St Paul wouldn’t have had to write letters to churches. What does it mean to have faith in Christ, and follow His commandments? If these things were self-defining then St Paul wouldn’t have had to write letters to churches to deal with issues and there wouldn’t be 30,000 Protestant denominations. The bottom line question is whether the Church that was founded by Christ at Pentecost exists. If not, then Christ’s promise wasn’t kept and there is no reason to be Christian. If it exists, then you should be a part of it, participate in the sacraments and body of Christ, and crucify your mind and be obedient to it. I’m not saying it’s bad to talk about issues, but either the Church is the authority or we are own authorities. Those are the choices. And if you trust a protestant pastor because they are smart or seem to be keeping with the Bible then you are still the authority, indirectly, because you’ve decided they meet your criteria (you’re still the judge). And saying scripture is the authority isn’t workable because scripture itself says scripture alone isn’t the only source of authority, and the church existed without scripture for centuries. An illiterate can be a Christian. So, it’s either you, or the church, that has the authority (including the authority to interpret scripture and apply it pastorally). Blessings on your journey.
@lynnmmartin 2 жыл бұрын
Guys, stop the angry comments and actually do your research. David has spent a lifetime studying the primary sources. What kind of “conspiracy” is that? If you disagree, read the sources yourself and refute this with some hard evidence, not just statements.
@NsanzeJimmy1 2 жыл бұрын
Thanks Gospel Simplicity for Hosting David W Bercot . His book will the Real Heretics Please Stand up helped me re-evaluate my Walk with Christ and that’s how I Joined the narrow path into the kingdom of God.
@IC_XC_NIKA 2 жыл бұрын
What church or narrow path is that?
@NsanzeJimmy1 2 жыл бұрын
@@IC_XC_NIKA The church is Called Followers of the Way Kampala Uganda 🇺🇬
@bryantmartin9309 2 жыл бұрын
Yes! Powerful book
@NsanzeJimmy1 2 жыл бұрын
@Zachary Trent I’m curious to know why you Called it “His revisionist History” have read The Early church Fathers?
@SoundFaithChannel 2 жыл бұрын
@Gospel Simplicity Congratulations on hitting 30K subs!!!👍
@GospelSimplicity 2 жыл бұрын
Thanks!
@peterdesmier6165 2 жыл бұрын
Thank you. This has been tremendous in helping me understand Mr Bercot.
@swenner64 2 жыл бұрын
David Bercot's book Dictionary of Early Christians beliefs encouraged me to become Orthodox.
@ThruTheUnknown 2 жыл бұрын
@@GS-cj7rf When writing against the IDOLATROUS practices. To which angel do orthodox take as their god?
@jessedutch3086 2 жыл бұрын
@@GS-cj7rf so where dit you land now?
@jessedutch3086 2 жыл бұрын
Just ordered the book. I see it as a shortcut to the PNW. Thank for the interview. Excellent that youre keeping the scope broad.
@swenner64 2 жыл бұрын
You're assuming that the Gnostic Art and worship of Angels was exactly like Orthodox Icons and Prayers to Angels? That is a stretch. All you have to do is study Modern Kabbalism, which is Gnosticism, and you will know that is not true. This is the Protestant problem you make yourself the Judge of everything as if you are an end in yourself. Every Protestant is a Pope, Each does what is right in their own eyes, and does what feels good to you and then you accuse those with a rigid adherence to the form of worship that they claim was passed on by the Apostles as the Tradition of Men. Who gives you your tradition where anything goes, Rock and Roll, Rock concert-like atmosphere, etc Even if your Luthern aren't you following Luther's Tradition of Men, or Calvin's, or AnaBaptist's or whatever protestant tradition. Keyword Tradition. I'll take the 1500-year-old Tradition over the 500 or even 5 or 1 year old at least those people were connected to the early church and the Apostles. In the Orthodox Church, we are saying Liturgies written by St. John Chrysostom and St. Basil the Great, such great men of God, I don't think I am on flimsy ground at all. I will venerate the Icon and say prayers to the saints and Angels, I will celebrate the feast and the fasts with a clear conscience that I am doing the will of God far more than you and your flimsy "Protestant tradition".
@ThruTheUnknown 2 жыл бұрын
@@GS-cj7rf You are equivocating my friend. Incantations, curious arts =/= asking the saints to pray to God for us and intercede on God's behalf for us. No more so than going to a pastor for advice on the topic of marriage. If this is bad please don't go to any church anymore, be a good protestant with your bible in the woods.
@johnpaulhumphrey2981 2 жыл бұрын
Will the real heretics please stand up was one of the first big introductions to church history for me. (The other being my Grandpa always used Justin Martyr when preaching.) My concern is two-fold. 1. Was council of Nicea really that big a change? It seems to me like there wasn't any major changes to the church, other than a bunch of people and the problems people bring to anything. 2. If the church really is the Body of Christ, can we make the body of Christ by just getting together and claiming to be the Body of Christ? doesn't Christ establish his Body, and didn't he establish it by means of the Apostles? I have deep respect for Bercot's work, and it has influenced me in several ways, especially pacifism, and my views on political interactions.
@someguyoverthere3275 2 жыл бұрын
DB is liar. He pulls passages to support his claims and then leaves the rest of the work behind - along with its context. So, a few things you will find if you look deep enough: 1. Iraneaus was discribing a group that LOOKED like and CLAIMED to be The Christian Church. And they were fooling the untrained. Iraneaus was writing to clergy to explain what people saw and what the differences were easy to see - as in styles and substance. Icons are visual theology and it has many rules. 2. Constantine didn't have a vote at the council. He did not speak in the arguements but listened. He trusted the Holy Spirit. 3. The emporer that inaugurated the iconoclasm held a false council that was not attended to by the Bishops. That emporer was Constantine the V and he SPOKE his demands to The Church and the Iconoclasm was enforced. That emporer has a name given to him by the Bishops. Copronymus and it means "Shit Mouth " That Ecumenical council held by the Copronymus is cited by DB and surely you see the problem with THAT. 4. If the Church were that far off the rails before the first millennium had passed, why does it look much the same now as it did then? It has been over 1200 years. Not a lot has really changed. If the Church really was what DB represents it as, then one would expect it to be unidentifiable compared to that time. Books are all the same. Even the designs of the crosses we wear. And the Liturgical practices are the same. DB's argument doesn't work if you follow up on his claims. He is a liar that is afraid of The Yoke our Lord Jesus spoke of. It is an unfounded fear.
@Steve-wg3cr 2 жыл бұрын
Great to see an interview with yet another Christian perspective. I admire the Anabaptists from history who shunned violence while others committed acts of violence in the name of Jesus.
@GospelSimplicity 2 жыл бұрын
Hope you enjoy it! I really appreciate that about Anabaptists as well
@arttyree4504 2 жыл бұрын
You're on the right track, Steve. And their movement is the result of going to the Bible--and being determined to obey it. No believer or group of believers is perfect--see Revelation Ch 22 for that--but the issue here is, what do we do with the Word. What did the Apostle Paul do? See Acts 20.32.
@Steve-wg3cr 2 жыл бұрын
@@arttyree4504 Anabaptists emphasized orthopraxy (correct behavior) as well as orthodoxy (correct doctrine). We would all do well to emulate them in that regard.
@andrewschiffer4323 2 ай бұрын
He is not an anabaptist. Uses it to deceive people into a strange unrelated doctrine. He was/is a JW, then Episcopal priest, does not agree with real anabaptist doctrines but calls his group this to deceive people who think he is of like mind.
@Solideogloria00 2 жыл бұрын
Life style over theology?? It’s both. Look at the Mormons and you’ll see why theology is crucial.
@eternalbyzantium262 2 жыл бұрын
Congrats on 30k bro
@Terry19330 2 жыл бұрын
Thank you!
@GospelSimplicity 2 жыл бұрын
You're welcome!
@evangeliums-missionathiopi5877 2 жыл бұрын
Wondetful, David is a great follower of Jesus!
@tmcc1647 2 жыл бұрын
Watching this while drinking out of my coffee cup (with an icon of St. Constantine on it) is pretty funny lol. ☦️☦️☦️
@arttyree4504 2 жыл бұрын
"Saint" Constantine remained a pagan after sponsoring the institutional version of Christianity. He was still making donations to pagan gods after his much-celebrated "conversion." A saint is one who is separated to God to live an obedient and pure life for Christ alone.
@NavelOrangeGazer 2 жыл бұрын
@@arttyree4504 St. Constantine legalizing Christianity led to more people becoming Christian than nearly anyone else in history. What have you done?
@tmcc1647 2 жыл бұрын
@@arttyree4504 **takes another sip of coffee**
@wartimemodels 2 жыл бұрын
@@arttyree4504 Your definition of "saint" is one you made up. You don't know his heart, the Church declared him a Saint, and his conversion had a massive positive impact on many Christians. Whether he had doubts, or continued discharging political duties (which is all paganism was at that point), isn't really for you to judge.
@ignatiusl.7478 2 жыл бұрын
This will be fascinating.
@GospelSimplicity 2 жыл бұрын
Hope you enjoy it!
@ignatiusl.7478 2 жыл бұрын
Unfortunately I was wrong. If I have to be honest I think he wants to be a faithful Christian. I appreciate his critiques of the wickedness of the Church throughout history. Unfortunately he is mistaken or confused on so many points. He doesn't strike me as a serious scholar but rather an articulate, smart armchair theologian. His analysis of history and theology are controlled by his presuppositions. Presuppositions that he doesn't seem to have ever really challenged. That's unfortunate.
@timothy6828 2 жыл бұрын
@@ignatiusl.7478 Can you please elaborate on what you see as the points he is mistaken or confused on? I just bought one of his books and I think he's right on many things...
@daleenduplessis6794 3 ай бұрын
You, your words and your spirit are just one you..... created in the image of God,His Word and His Spirit.... one God.
@stephenchelius7461 2 жыл бұрын
I enjoyed this interview, very informative. I also enjoyed his dictionary of early Christian beliefs. A few comments: 1. Lex Orandi Lex Credendi - We cannot separate belief and practice. It is interesting how he was looking for the church that practiced most closely to the early fathers. But I don't think it is necessarily a perfect arbiter. Practice flows forth from Belief in Truth and not the other way around. 2. We cannot not judge a system by its abuse, but by its true adherents. If he saw great Saints in Francis and Thomas a Kempis, it is interesting that he did not bring further consideration to the truth claims of the Catholic Church. 3. He rejected "narrowing" admission to the Church based on doctrinal development, such as the word "homoousios". But the word is simply a tool that helps us to define the substance of a doctrine. Those who do not adhere to the substance of a truth claim are cast out (ie. in this case the consubstantial unity of the persons of the trinity). If the substance of a teaching is in accordance with scripture, such as this particular example is, I do not understand his resistance to excommunication on these grounds.
@autisticheadscarf 2 жыл бұрын
This is going to be very interesting 🤔
@GospelSimplicity 2 жыл бұрын
Hope you enjoy it!
@calsmith5495 2 жыл бұрын
I left the Orthodox church for the same reasons, I felt such a huge barrier between me and God in that church. That barrier was all the stuff they add to the simplicity of the gospel. Barrier after barrier, it was horrible, I was reading the fathers more than scripture! There was also so much church pride and ego.
@digitalsublime 2 жыл бұрын
Really? I have never felt so close to God since I started to pray like the Church recommends, specially the Jesus prayer and all the apophatic tradition. We tend to judge the sin in others, but just today we have sinned against God several times without even realizing it. Hope God Blesses your journey!
@aerosmithorlilbomber3076 2 жыл бұрын
Yeah Carl keep dreaming poaching Orthodox people with your pseudo "ex-Orthodox" narrative. Those set of languages like "barrier between me and God" are not the language of an Orthodox baptized or formerly part of.
@orthodoxempire697 2 жыл бұрын
@@aerosmithorlilbomber3076 100%
@MrJMB122 2 жыл бұрын
How did you leave the jewel grew up and brother. I converted to the orthodox church. I traveled around seeing other churches. What I see with the orthodoxy is not just you know historical continuity but there is no barrier how I see the saints the icons and traditions how they act their old windows directions people that point you to Christ and that are filled with God. Their is no barrier to God because he presented and eternal
@alexjurado6029 2 жыл бұрын
Listening to this in my car, and I thought Austin was interviewing Grant Cardone, lol.
@01ombladon 2 жыл бұрын
This should be interesting. I can't wait to see the Anabaptist interpretation on ,,the gates of hell shall not prevail against it".
@lilwaynesworld0 2 жыл бұрын
The Anabaptist and Quakers really sought a lifestyle of the early church did they succeed? I just don’t think you can go back in time and replicate it in order to experience the same fruits. The apostolic period was once and for all in a certain sense but I will listen and try to learn something new
@SoundFaithChannel 2 жыл бұрын
We seek to practice what Christ teaches and do not take a complicated Interpretation. We read the early Christians, especially those who are disciples of the apostles.
@Yallquietendown 2 жыл бұрын
Don’t they believe they’ve always existed as an underground church or is that just the Baptist ?
@ChristopherWentling 2 жыл бұрын
It’s interesting that he read the ante nicene fathers and took away from it the social aspect of it but didn’t seem to care about their theology. It is clear from even a cursory reading of those fathers that whatever changes have been made since their time that they are much more Catholic concerning such things as the offices of the church and the sacraments than anabaptists.
@stefang.9763 2 жыл бұрын
Looks to me that your argument is build on the presupposition that the Church of Christ is represented by a certain institution. Then it goes circular and it assumes that since you are the true church you can bring in any heresy in and call it orthodoxy.
@etheretherether 2 жыл бұрын
There seems to be a ton of Orthodox and Protestant believers shooting way past each other in the comments. “Do you not trust the Holy Spirit to guide the visible Church” And “Do you not trust the Holy Spirit to guide believers in understanding the gospel, especially given that God says to pray for wisdom and it will be granted” Seem like dishonest framings meant to shame the opponent into submitting or giving up. I don’t agree with everything DB says, but his perspective is definitely useful in sifting through Church history
@patrickvaldenor2544 2 жыл бұрын
Oh man YES FINALLY i know i posted this before on one of your other videos a while ago but again i highly recommend palmer becker’s book “ anabaptist essentials”
@GospelSimplicity 2 жыл бұрын
Thanks!
@Jim-Mc 2 жыл бұрын
For a historical background on "believers baptism " or Restoration Movement theology check out any of the scholarship from some of the "Church of Christ" universities. Abilene, Pepperdine, Lipscomb etc. Dr. 's Mark Black or Phillip Camp.
@ContemplativeSoul 2 жыл бұрын
I've known a few who call themselves kingdom minded Christians and have a similar mindset to David Bercot. What I've noticed is that minimizing theology with the intention of being more action focused, sometimes leads to a magical view of the actions bestowing grace - or leads to a capricious view what we're called to do and a legalistic focus instead of being called to ontological goodness. Of course we wouldn't/ shouldn't do any of those acts of obedience in the first place if they weren't rooted in ontology and being- that being who we believe Jesus is. I think they would agree if they think this out, but sometime after the point of faith they forget this and that path of logic and then minimize theology. Orthopraxy is rooted in Orthodoxy, but with the modem fundamentalist there seems to be this idea that the tasks we do are something separate that we add to a check off list. For this reason there is a lack of cohesion in both message and even the view of the human person. Our emotional life, our mental health, are also separate pieces that sometimes we ignore as we try to push through our tasklist of Christian duties. What Bercot seems to miss is that a primary focus on actions was often written in light of apologetics as they tried to show outsiders what separated them, but this does not mean that actions and being different in and of itself was their personal and internal motivations. The Church had real beliefs on who Christ was in his Being, and since those beliefs rested in real ontological ideas, not in a faithfulness to just words and terminology alone, as the Church changed from those with a Jewish background to those of a Greek and Roman background, it was necessary to search for new words that could convey eternal truths. And Bercot's belief that one or two personalities will sway the entire Church to whatever they say seems to undercut believing the Holy Spirit can guide a church or that man is capable of reason.
@zachsmith8916 2 жыл бұрын
I really enjoyed this. I would love to see you talk to more folks from the broader free church tradition.
@GospelSimplicity 2 жыл бұрын
Anyone specific?
@zachsmith8916 2 жыл бұрын
@@GospelSimplicity Matt Whitman from the Ten Minute Bible Hour would be awesome especially given his own friendly yet definitely not affirming interaction with Catholicism. Others that I think would be great would be Darrel Bock and Leighton Flowers. I think it would be cool to talk to Matt Boswell about Hymnary and singing in the low church tradition. Thanks for the response. I would love to see more stuff like this. Great job!
@justanotherlikeyou 2 жыл бұрын
When I came out of Seventh-day Adventism I came across Mr. Bercot's Dictionary Of Early Christian Beliefs and Will The Real Heretics Please Stand Up. They were both helpful in my personal journey. I eventually ended up swimming the Bosphorus and joining Christ's original Church.
@01ombladon 2 жыл бұрын
Glad you became Orthodox
@justanotherlikeyou 2 жыл бұрын
@@01ombladon Me too, thank God
@justanotherlikeyou 2 жыл бұрын
@Christos Kyrios I also studied the Ante-Nicene Fathers, I have the set, and became convinced they were true Christians, and basically I looked for the Church I was reading about. I find it interesting that Mr. Bercot never seems to mention the Holy Eucharist or the role of bishops, presbyters, or deacons in Church governance, things that St. Ignatius of Antioch was very strong about, and that's incredibly early on. Anyways, Orthodox Christianity just fit the model of the Church better from what I was reading. But that's only half the reason. The other half I won't get into here. I just wanted to give you an answer to your question.
@justanotherlikeyou 2 жыл бұрын
@Christos Kyrios I was referring to this interview, that he doesn't mention them really. Also, I was only replying to your question as to why I went Orthodox. In my reply I didn't give all the reasons, just the one that seemed most pertinent to your question and the contents of this video. I wasn't looking for agreement from you on any of what I said. I was just giving you my reasons. Also, I wasn't saying anything about Anabaptists either, so there's literally nothing to agree with me about on that subject.
@sillysyriac8925 2 жыл бұрын
@Christos Kyrios There is no way to read the early church fathers and come to deny the Orthodox belief in the real presence. Doing otherwise is a major cope by prot church historians trying to wiggle their way out of the obvious or arguing against the specifics of transubstantiation.
@levifroese3936 2 жыл бұрын
As a mennonite who is becoming orthodox this is a great interview. It doesn't change my direction in becoming orthodox but it does remind me of the wonderful things I will miss. I do struggle with the orthodox history of being so involved in government, and I will miss the universal understanding of pacifism among mennonites. However I do feel that the orthodox church does still hold to many of the pillars that are mentioned in the interview, they don't have one single ruler/pope so they are some what governed locally, I don't think they go too far in trying to explain the mysteries of God like the Catholics do, and I do think it has been beneficial that the orthodox church has faced a lot more persecution than the catholics, keeping them from arriving at that level of worldly power. I think pacifism and seperation of church and state is something anabaptists get right that no other denominations really seem to focus on
@jabunkyy 2 жыл бұрын
I don’t think mennonites would say pacifist. They would use terminology “non resistant”. Basically, no violence against persons is ever justified, even if you or your family are being attacked. It goes much beyond not joining a standing army or whatever. Their view most certainly a step too far and an affront to justice. (Source: very conservative anabaptist family members)
@dylanarmour6727 7 ай бұрын
Interesting comment I left the Mennonites and became orthodox
@jackiewright4402 2 ай бұрын
@@dylanarmour6727 Yikes! How is that working out? Just curious-it seems like a huge jump in many ways-from simplicity and focused to being extremely ceremonious and complicated.
@dylanarmour6727 2 ай бұрын
@@jackiewright4402 it’s fine the church year revolves around events in the Bible
@leoandolino4668 Жыл бұрын
David Bercot's work in a way was an important initial step to my coming into the Eastern Orthodox Church. I wonder if he had looked into the Didache which is an amazing early Christian teaching manual for gentiles? The Didache though noncanonical stands alone- I think. It really helps clarify important particulars of becoming a Believer from a world of paganism.
@jg7923 2 жыл бұрын
Hey Austin, have you had a chance to contact Dr. Bobby Conway or anyone at Calvary Chapel about an interview ?
@GospelSimplicity 2 жыл бұрын
I have not yet
@jg7923 2 жыл бұрын
@@GospelSimplicity Thanks for everything that you do with this channel.
@SoundFaithChannel 2 жыл бұрын
Check out the Romans series by David Bercot on the Sound Faith KZfaq Channel. 😊
@SoundFaithChannel 2 жыл бұрын
@Christos Kyrios I can’t speak for all Anabaptists but for the Anabaptists groups that I know we do not follow Luther. We read from the Orthodox Study Bible(septuagint). We do not teach any of the Alones. We directly teach against Luther's teachings. We quote the first three centuries Christians in most of our sermons. You should check out the first sermon in the Romans series about what we think about Luther on the Sound faith channel.
@SoundFaithChannel 2 жыл бұрын
@Christos Kyrios We would believe the books in the Septuagint are God's word because Jesus and His disciples all quoted from the Septuagint, which would have had those books. Also, the early Christians read from the Septuagint. The Apocrypha was in the Bibles of the world until around 1800, and all the first Anabaptists used the books in the Apocrypha and quoted from them heavily. I know Luther and Calvin have heavily influenced many Anabaptist groups. Those groups we would still call brothers, but they would not use the Septuagint. As for theosis, I'm not sure. We believe we must abide in Christ and continue to walk in the light as Jesus is in the light and continually bear fruit, or we will be cut off the vine.
@IgnatiusEmanuel 2 жыл бұрын
@@DoseOfBrilliance The faith once for all delivered to the saints is what they are after. Not conforming to the patterns of the world is also very evident among the Anabaptist.
@afotw1141 2 жыл бұрын
@@SoundFaithChannel The Romans Series through the eyes of the early Christians series is amazing. I cannot wait to watch them all.
@NsanzeJimmy1 2 жыл бұрын
@@afotw1141 I have watched it and trust me it’s Eye opening
@shawnhampton8503 2 жыл бұрын
A perspective from the 16th century... this should be... interesting.
@GospelSimplicity 2 жыл бұрын
Hopefully!
@holdmybeer8224 2 жыл бұрын
No,the perspective from a former JW
@LightOfAllMankind 2 жыл бұрын
With all due respect, I have a hard time believing he would know better than St. Cyril of Alexandria whether or not if Nestorius was a heretic or not. The only reason why Rome is reaching out and seeking reunion with the Assyrian Church is because of their ecumenical ambitions.
@etheretherether 2 жыл бұрын
Did they necessarily continue to meet liturgically under Nero? Not intending this as an argument, just curious what the orthodox view is. As a Protestant I was aleays taught that very early on the Church followed a similar liturgy to the Second Temple Jews (none of the apostles viewed themselves as starting a totally new religion), so presumably very similar to the Eastern Orthodox, but during heavy persecution I the first couple centuries many of the (local) churches had to abandoned this in favor of meeting in homes or in catacombs.
@LightOfAllMankind 2 жыл бұрын
@@etheretherether it was always liturgical whether in a home, cave, catacomb, or out in the open
@etheretherether 2 жыл бұрын
Thanks! Would you kind pointing me to some primary sources on this (or at least archaeological sources)?
@LightOfAllMankind 2 жыл бұрын
@@etheretherether In the NT, the apostles went to the synagogues, so that should answer your question about the time of Nero. But there’s also the Dura Europa house church and synagogue (two separate entities) that date back before the Edict of Milan, and archaeology showed much to the surprise of scholars that there were wall icons, in both. So the iconic liturgical orientation that we continue has historical attestation.
@etheretherether 2 жыл бұрын
@@LightOfAllMankind I hear Dura-Europa cited a lot by EO Apologists, how are they so sure the depictions are icons (intended for veneration and use in worship) and not just educational. I have personally attended Protestant churches that had murals of Bibical events (especially in childrens rooms), that where very obviously not intended for veneration or worship. IIRC there where no murals in the assembly hall where the presbyter would teach and lead worship in the Dura Europa. Just to clarify, I'm not arguing against icon veneration. I don't do it, and I have a pretty clear idea in my head of what kind of evidence would change my mind, but I understand all the arguments that separate it from simple idolatry. Although, I would note that even pagans are aware that their gods do not reside within the idol, or are literally the idol, but they also view their icons as doors to another realm where the object of there worship exists. From Buddhist and Hindu friends I've known this is very clear. Thanks for the answer though. Besides the art (or perhaps icons) and existence of an assembly hall I didn't realize that the Dura Europa was evidence of a mostly liturgical style of service. So does this mean that (besides in recent years) Christians pretty much always found a way to do church liturgically, even under persecution? I wonder how that would work an areas where it's very difficult to meet in large numbers due to poverty etc. Can an EO service be performed outdoors?
@olivegrove-gl3tw 2 жыл бұрын
have you ever heard any of ken Johnsons studies on the Dead Sea scrolls and the essenes??? I would love your intake on it
@CorbinatorLoL 2 жыл бұрын
14:59 Lifestyle over theology sounds a bit like deeds over creeds, or law over gospel.
@dreamweaver3406 Жыл бұрын
agree-he does think the early church believed you can lose your salvation and good works after initial salvation is necessary
@alexcarson2065 2 жыл бұрын
There are a lot of good, practical things we can learn from the Anabaptists. I enjoy my time fellowshipping with them very much. Its very interesting that this is where Bercot landed, given his previous work when he was an Anglican Priest, after leaving the Jehovah's Witnesses. In the 2nd edition of his book, "Will the real heretics please stand up" Chapter 14 was entitled, "The Myth Of The Pilgrim Church." The chapter right before it (chapter 13) was entitled, "What Happened To Early Christianity," where he talked about the parables of the wedding feast and dragnet, and where he affirmed the belief in one, catholic and Apostolic Church that the gates of Hades will never prevail against. He removed this chapter in the current edition, and has put out an entire book defending the concept of the pilgrim church which is at the center of the "Kingdom Christian" movement he became somewhat of a celebrity in before joining the Anabaptists. Just some things for the viewer to be aware of while watching this!
@GospelSimplicity 2 жыл бұрын
Thanks for the background!
@alexcarson2065 2 жыл бұрын
@Christos Kyrios In my experience, they wholly reject eternal security and believe our actions directly impact our salvation, which is far closer to RC/Orthodox. The big difference is the idea of the remnant/pilgrim church vs the real, visable body with apostolic succession. As we see in the video, Bercot often points to groups like the Waldensians to support this concept. Yet the Waldensians strongly believed in infant baptism, something anabaptists obviously condemn. It speaks to the incoherence of Bercots position that beliefs don't really matter and its all about outward appearances and actions, yet somehow an undeniably outward action like baptism doesn't count. This is one example of why I believe "invisible" sins like pride, especially of doctrine, are incurable in Bercots version of Christianity. When any disagreement allows both parties to just split off and start their own version identical to the previous, less the 1 issue, there is no way to cure the root of the issue, pride. Divorce and remarriage is at the forefront of this issue in the kingdom movement and groups like "Followers of the Way". Disputes over consequentialism vs reconciliation with the first spouse are quite literally unsolvable in this paradigm. Its hard to really say what Luther would even think about the movement named after him in its current form, so I can't really speak to that much.
@alexcarson2065 2 жыл бұрын
@Christos Kyrios I can't speak for an entire group (especially one that I'm not even a part of), but I'd think that would rely on each individual's heart.
@alexcarson2065 2 жыл бұрын
@Christos Kyrios I don't think that's what I said at all. I'd imagine pretty much everyone agrees that living a Godly life for the expectation of payment instead of the glory of God is a misguided approach and a misunderstanding of what happens when we accept Christ.
@alexcarson2065 2 жыл бұрын
@Christos Kyrios the Protestant doctrine of imputed righteousness is one of the big failures of the movement. The idea that the Trinity is somehow divided against itself defies pretty much everything we know about God. There is no mercy with Imputed righteousness, there is just an impersonal transaction that fully pays for the crime, with zero forgiveness.
@Steve-wg3cr 2 жыл бұрын
This may have been my favorite of all your interviews Austin. Mr. Bercot commented on the problems created by the merger of church/state following the conversion of Constantine the Great. I agree there were certainly negative consequences to Christianity becoming the favored and later official religion of the Roman Empire. But from what I know about history, the modern concept of separation of church and state was probably unheard of throughout most of human history. Fortunately, we have freedom of religion in our nation and do not have face the problem of government coercion regarding our religious beliefs.
@Dlee-eo5vv 2 жыл бұрын
All those guys are church fathers and Saints working out the one faith of the one church and our participation in her!!!
@danielcartwright8868 Жыл бұрын
Please get Mako Nagasawa on your channel! He's really well versed in early church literature and loves to talk about the atonement.
@lazaruscomeforth7646 2 жыл бұрын
That the boundaries of the Church got more and more narrowly defined is a very good historical point. At 28:15 it would seem that the ecclesiological transformation became even more pronounced through the period of the Theodosian dynasty, when the Church became a State Church.
@digitalsublime 2 жыл бұрын
The narrowing was prompted as defense from the heretics, pagan, gnostics. It was a necessary growth, to see it as departure is questionable at best.
@lazaruscomeforth7646 2 жыл бұрын
@@digitalsublime To say adaptation to a situation is justifiable is one thing, but to say that a generation's adaptation is eternally binding upon pain of excommunication and anathema is another thing entirely. The generations only increasingly narrowed the allowable, and so what the Apostles allowed and would allow is no longer allowed, which is absurd.
@digitalsublime 2 жыл бұрын
@@lazaruscomeforth7646 It's not like that though. You only land outside when you promulgate false doctrine. The Orthodox Church only asks of you to believe the creed, there is no narrowing, I would say quite the contrary the Church has evolved into leniency. I would love to go back to stricter times, taking in account the Didache and old monastic rules, or public confession in front of the assembly we can see with little amount of inquiry that the Church hasn't become more excluding but more lenient on what is expected from the member.
@lazaruscomeforth7646 2 жыл бұрын
@@digitalsublime That's not accurate, for the filioque existed in the West for centuries, and was even affirmed by St. Cyril of Alexandria and St. Maximus the Confessor, but now it is considered a heresy worthy of anathema. Moreover, the religious veneration of icons became a novel condition for membership in Christ's Body that was never present in Apostolic or Ante-Nicene times.
@digitalsublime 2 жыл бұрын
@@lazaruscomeforth7646 If you like the filoque you can be roman Catholic. Icons are in very old churches, discovered by archeology, you can choose to not venerate them. You only have to believe the Nicene Creed without the Roman addition. Also orthodoxy doesn't deny salvation outside of the Church because you're not orthodox, that's up to Christ. Seems you are narrowing what you accept about orthodoxy not the other way around.
@brunoabreu6547 9 ай бұрын
Change 'lifestyle' to 'obedience to Christ,' and you'll see how important that is
@vernonlong4936 2 жыл бұрын
Anabaptism is a very interesting and unique stream of Christianity which came out of the Reformation.
@GospelSimplicity 2 жыл бұрын
Indeed!
@arttyree4504 2 жыл бұрын
The Anabaptists did NOT come out of the Reformation. Their movement was separate and simultaneous with the Lutheran and Calvinist beginnings. Anabaptists are not a denomination, but rather descendants of truth-seekers in several different countries who made the same discoveries about the Gospel and obedience and came to the same views by reading the Bible and obeying what they saw.
@vernonlong4936 2 жыл бұрын
Art Tyree, My apologies, I must have been misinformed. I was a part of a conservative Mennonite church for a number of years and that's what they always told us. They said that the reformers did not go far enough, so the anabaptist movement was the "Radical Reformation". They must have been misrepresenting themselves.
@filiusvivam4315 2 жыл бұрын
replace the word "interesting" with "heretical", and I agree.
@vernonlong4936 2 жыл бұрын
@@filiusvivam4315 Why do you say that? Just curious.
@AABlann Ай бұрын
Interesting thoughts on the anti-Nicaean practices, authority, and value. I am curious Mr. Bercot's view on the canon of the Bible since it was a post Nicaean councils Hippo and Carthage and locked down the cannon. This is not a criticism of his focus but a curiosity of how he views the canon. I find it interesting to see the level of variation in the very early Church circa the Epistles.
@newdawnrising8110 2 жыл бұрын
Bro David is still more influenced by his JW upraising then he realizes. It’s great that he is searching for the teachings of the early church and what they believed and practiced. I dare say that he rather needs to understand the experience that the early church was built on. Belief and doctrine are shallow and only a surface understanding of real Christianity. Knowledge of God is eternal life and one must discover the kingdom within. Otherwise you are still operating from the outside material and fallen world. Also if he actually understood the idea of the trinity it would totally change his life and the world but most are not ready for that. The Orthodox are the closest to the original church and their understanding. It’s no longer an empire religion.
@arttyree4504 2 жыл бұрын
Experience and behavior are built on "belief and doctrine"--therefore, get the Foundation right first. See Matthew 7, Acts 20.32, etc.
@digitalsublime 2 жыл бұрын
In other words what the early Church is on "way of living" is the ascetic life of monks from the Eastern tradition, way more than the Mennonite luddite emphasis. In the other hand you don't see Amish and Mennonites falling for the jab 🤷♂️
@sia9907 2 жыл бұрын
Personal experience of God - knowledge of God - teaches love. Fruits matter. 🙏
@bonniejohnstone 2 жыл бұрын
How do Anabaptists deal with the early Bible structure of Presbyter’s, Deacons/Deaconess and Bishops? No mention of the early monastics and practices like fasting? Did they pick and choose bits here and there creating a modern version stripped of the ‘distasteful old stuff.
@SoundFaithChannel 2 жыл бұрын
The Anabaptists have Bishops, Elders, and Deacons. We also fast every Wednesday and other times as we choose except on Sunday. I can't speak for all Anabaptists. What distasteful old stuff are you talking about? We do not buy into any of the writings after Constantine. Not that some of them were not spiritual. We believe the church before Constantine is what we should strive for, and we call that The Historic Faith.
@flawlessvic 2 жыл бұрын
You can live an incoherent tradition if you want. However, historical revisionism is beyond cringe. You betray truth. That takes a toll on your soul.
@andrewschiffer4323 2 ай бұрын
Beware, this person has created an "ordained" position of an ordained teaching elder where in Anabaptist circles no such position exists. he was however an " Elder" in the Jehovah's Witness groups. He was an "Ordained" Episcopal minister and seeks to put himself in a leadership position. He backtracks anywhere where his authority starts to become in questions. I am Beachy Amish, in our circles and most Anabaptist circles I am aware of, ministers, deacons, Bishops are elected by nomination and then chosen by lot as the scripture teaches.
@pigetstuck 6 ай бұрын
Austin, how much did this interview affect your journey?
@duenstorm 2 жыл бұрын
Also no theology? REALLY? Did he read Irenaeus?
@duenstorm 2 жыл бұрын
@Christos Kyrios Again, read Irenaeus
@duenstorm 2 жыл бұрын
@Christos Kyrios No, you miss the point. Irenaeus writings are deeply theological. Saying the early Christians weren't interested in it is silly
@cghrios783 Жыл бұрын
Thanks for these interviews. I am struggling to understand although I have faith. Please could you ask him if he thinks Jesus know of when the “last day” will be or it is still as Jesus said no one but the Father knows.
@verwesne8121 2 жыл бұрын
Not trying to be mean spirited. Like many others I got into church history by reading a few of his popular books on the early Christians. And I was blown away by the things I read and how it busted the bubble of the right Protestant doctrine many hold to without realizing how anti historic and un-biblical these beliefs really were. So that was great...BUT then after more and more studies, one can’t help but almost feel „betrayed” by mister Bercot. Tough he expresses a deep appreciation for the early church, but it seems he only takes them “so far” as to not hurt his Protestant standpoint in its essence. Though the more I studied church history afresh and kept my Protestant bias-glasses off, you can’t help but realize that if you want to go all the way, and end up with the fullest Christian expression of faith and doctrine, as the early Christians did, you won’t stay Protestant... I think it was the amazing Paul Henry Newman who said “to be deep in history is to cease being Protestant” and like countless converts to Catholicism from Protestantism can agree whole heartedly...yes, Newman was and is with his quote right on the money. And in this regard I don’t think mister Bercot is absolutely honest or willfully selective. It’s OK to not be catholic if one absolutely doesn’t want to be and not willing to study it all the way and whatever reasons one may have....I rather have a Protestant brother who at least has some relationship with God and His church, then an atheist friend who doesn’t want to acknowledge God and His kingdom at all . But when early Christians who by fair evaluation are and sound very much catholic, are distorted and selectively quoted as to Make them come of like Anabaptists or “Protestant’ish”...then I think this is greatly harming and distorting their testimony and legacy which they produced (writings and teachings) to bring people closer to Jesus AND to His church. Anyway God bless Bercot and May help him with health and clarity on these issues
@Adam-ue2ig 2 жыл бұрын
If you really read Augustine and many other so called Catholics it was not by accident that luther and Calvin so often quoted him and other fathers. Its not some kind of dishonesty.
@Adam-ue2ig 2 жыл бұрын
Listen here m.kzfaq.info/love/tWDnUokOD--s2aFxLT5uVA
@Adam-ue2ig 2 жыл бұрын
Response m.kzfaq.info/get/bejne/aKd1gKqU1cyYlmw.html
@arttyree4504 2 жыл бұрын
Yes, this is a typical report by people who "discover" church history. The conclusion we draw about the Ancient Elders (Church "fathers") is determined by our view of Holy Scripture. This becomes a real issue when you get to the post-Nicene "fathers" (Jesus said Call no man your father), and the elders/"fathers" go increasingly off the rails of strictly biblical doctrine. The two hierarchal religious empires have to deny Biblical finality, and establish a dogma of ongoing councils, ancient elders, traditions, etc. in order to justify practices and beliefs in their system that are clearly (to biblical people) not Biblical. Arguments will go on and on of course over this vital issue. My counsel is: "R T B!" Many ramifications connect to Bible study, I know. However, if one begins reading the Gospels, the Epistles, the Law and Prophets, the true Gospel will become clear, and the open-minded--and open hearted--reader will see who today most approximates the First-Century faith. (Hint: it's not protestants. Or evangelicals. Or the hierarchal empires. . .) Acts 20.32.
@gmahlman 2 жыл бұрын
Does David feel that the Council of Nicea wasn't necessary? Does he feel that the Holy Spirit would misguide the Church for 2000 years? Arianism at the time was rampant. It is really naive to assume that after 325 AD changes or doctrinal development would NOT occur. His qualms about later Christian behavior is painted with such a broad brush, lacking in nuance and missing in historical detail. Before 325 there was Christian dissent and problems as well. That's why Christ in the Bible gave Peter the power to bind and lose. The term Trinity for example would be now considered 'orthodox' but is not in the bible. Why therefore knock the later Church for introducing new terms (binding and losing) into the church when circumstances warrant.
@arttyree4504 2 жыл бұрын
No the Holy Spirit has not misguided the "church" for 2,000 years. But others have. Acts 20.32
@ggductor1511 2 жыл бұрын
The serpent came immediately into the garden , hath God really said? Opposition came in immediately on the new believers, so your statement seems almost childish
@keithwolfe1942 2 жыл бұрын
Not to Peter alone, but the Apostles, not Bishops, nor Popes or Patriarchs, no other but the 12.
@djrobinson6602 2 жыл бұрын
Through David’s work I almost joined a Church of Christ congregation but I also held to the real presence of the Eucharist which Church of Christ churches do not believe. So there I was with a Church of Christ view of baptism, with really a Lutheran view of the Eucharist. Since there were no churches that aligned with those beliefs, I considered forming a house church with a few friends. Then I realized how absurd it was to assume that Jesus’s Church still didn’t exist after 2000 years and that I would need to restore it. It seems that Mr. Bercot and many others like myself in the past have this view of rebuilding or restoring the church, but the truth is Jesus said the gates of Hell would not prevail against His Church and that He would guide it. We need to stop living in Trail of Blood conspiracy theories and just stick with the beliefs passed on from the Apostles through apostolic succession. We are not smarter than the church fathers. I plan on becoming Catholic or Orthodox.
@sillysyriac8925 2 жыл бұрын
Had a few thoughts along a similar vein.
@TheRedFox1995 2 жыл бұрын
Why not become lutheran?:)
@lazaruscomeforth7646 2 жыл бұрын
Why not Anglican? Why not Coptic? Why not Assyrian Church of the East? These, together with the Romanists and the Orthodox, all share a mutually exclusive ecclesiology (except the Anglican, thankfully, because of the Reformation) that they developed following Constantine and especially the Theodosian dynasty (379-457), where they confused the Church as an organic population of believers in continuity from the Apostles with each of their own respective imperialized institutions. The Reformation restored the Church's unity in diversity model (as clearly reflected in any harmony of the Protestant and Reformed Confessions on this issue), and even though it doesn't solve all problems in this world for the Church, it at least recognizes the reality that one can be Christian and not in one's own association of local churches. To be Romanist or Orthodox is to (blasphemously) say that all others are separated from "the" Church and therefore from Christ and salvation.
@Gregorydrobny 2 жыл бұрын
@@lazaruscomeforth7646 there is more similarity between the Orthodox Church and Coptic Church than there is between "Reformed' church bodies who boast the same name. There is more division within just the Anglican Church than there is between Eastern Churches who aren't even in communion with one another (Oriental Orthodox, Coptic, Assyrian, and the Orthodox Church). @DJ Robinson, the Orthodox Church will welcome you, and I'm happy to answer any and all questions I can about it.
@flickering_wick 2 жыл бұрын
I went searching through denominations and church history for many years before finally becoming Orthodox. I spent years unsure of where the true church existed and in what form. Now I have no doubt and am fully at peace. I pray you will join the one true church as well. It is beautiful. It is true. It is the bride of Christ.
@jdlee1972 2 жыл бұрын
Live the lifestyle. No theological unity. Then what were councils for? If the early fathers did not feel that theology and fidelity to a singular belief was important what were councils for? While I can understand that everyone has the right to choose what to believe I m still amazed at his stand. But ok. God bless.
@Jokl92 2 жыл бұрын
Oh cool, I've read one of his books and it seemed very much like his view was the only right and acceptable view which really turned me off. I'm happy to give him a second chance! Really looking forward to the interview!
@GospelSimplicity 2 жыл бұрын
That's interesting to hear. I don't think that was his intention, as he mentions in this interview at least that he doesn't think everyone needs to be an Anabaptist
@MrKneeV 2 жыл бұрын
While I would strongly disagree with his point of view, I have a lot more respect for someone who sticks to his guns and is convinced that something is true than I do for someone who has no stance and says that anything could be true.
@jterrellielli7058 2 жыл бұрын
Nothing changed. He remains his own Pope. Full of pride and arrogance.
@MrTzarBomb 2 жыл бұрын
Halfway through, it seems clear the measure of Christianity is his own view of purity. Even his comments on the creed as authoritative as scripture is anachronistic considering who and when scripture canon was defined. In other words, he denies a physical church that knew orthodox belief and had an authority to make distinction as problems arose.
@dnaak 2 жыл бұрын
I concur. I kept hearing "These are the beliefs that the Church has to have. One of them is that I can believe whatever I want to believe. And the anabaptists allow that for me."
@barelyprotestant5365 2 жыл бұрын
Not sure what he means in that swipe he took against Anglicanism, especially when there are major liberal elements in the Anabaptist tradition.
@barelyprotestant5365 2 жыл бұрын
@Christos Kyrios no. He was referring to Continuing Anglicanism, which is rather explicitly traditional.
@barelyprotestant5365 2 жыл бұрын
@Christos Kyrios it depends. Largely speaking, you could call them Anglo-Catholic. Some of them would be more comfortable with being called "high church". Some, "Reformed Catholic". But in a general sense, yes.
@davidbolt9566 2 жыл бұрын
Listening to this and wondering a lot of the same things, and struggling to land at a place where I feel confident in my interpretation of history and theodicy often leaves me wondering why Jesus ever had to leave.
@digitalsublime 2 жыл бұрын
Jesus didn't really left He was ascended to higher management, there is more to reality than just the physical temporal aspect that we live in, from there He distributes the Holy Spirit from the Father. All our petty disagreements are just our sinful nature in expression, but we need to remember that "loves covers a multitude of sins"
@davidbolt9566 2 жыл бұрын
@@digitalsublime I gotcha, but I think you kinda know what I mean. A lot of these petty disagreements wouldnt have ever happened if we coulda just been like "hey Jesus, what about this"? But I recognize that since my desire is not the reality that is is less wise than what God decided to do. I just gotta get the weight of it off my chest sometimes. Being a Christian is hard sometimes.. I wish we could at least do it together.
@digitalsublime 2 жыл бұрын
@@davidbolt9566 I would have to explain many things to you, but, let me try to help you. In Orthodox tradition there is something called Theosis that is becoming like Christ, in the practical apophatic tradition, we have asceticism, this is older than even John the Baptist. You see, communion with the assembly is just a part of the life in Christ, and what you experience is the worldly aspect of the Church, the angelic life is lived in the monastic life of eastern tradition. Take it like this, we start to climb this mountain that we call Christianity towards the summit that is Christ, but in this journey we stop to look and judge others that are at our side, below and even beyond us, there is also camp base with others, that is comfortable, that we mistake as the summit sometimes (fellowship), is a very human thing to do, but, we are called not to do this, and to set our sight in the summit and keep on walking. As we do this we will see less and less people as the road gets narrower and narrower, we WILL encounter His presence, and we WILL be challenged by His Holiness that will be overwhelming like it was in the transfiguration for the Apostles. But first we have to climb in the awakening of the Nous, the eye of the heart. I'll suggest you try the Jesus prayer to avoid looking to other sojourners, "Lord Jesus Christ, have Mercy on me, a sinner" God Bless you.
@davidbolt9566 2 жыл бұрын
@@digitalsublime Yeh man, I've been studying Orthodoxy pretty seriously from around a year and a half now and have considered on and off becoming a Catechumen. But I still find a lot of things about Orthodoxy unconvincing. I think this mountain analogy I have heard and I just not sure thats an accurate paradigm for understanding theosis. I would think the Holiest climber of all would descend the mountain to suffer and struggle for those with broken ankles at the mountains base, rather than continue climbing, leaving his brothers to the wolves. True love knows not great than when a person gives up their life for their friends. And it is by descending the mountain to save our brothers that we *actually* ascend it, yanno? Idk, I'd be curious to hear your thoughts for sure
@digitalsublime 2 жыл бұрын
@@davidbolt9566 When you have a materialistic view, you only consider charity as something physical. But we forget that all reality is based on God, and His Holy Spirit, hence, prayer is the most powerful intercession for the suffering followed by fasting, being up in the mountain allows for helping in this way and also in material ways, is not an either or situation. And yes the highest point of this mountain is serving others, but as I expressed there is nuance on how we understand this, and there is lack in our understanding of Faith and prayer. But remember we celebrate Saints in the same measure we celebrate Martyrs, that is to give your life for protecting the path to God. This path is what we need to show others, poverty of Spirit can lead us away, and poverty and suffering in the world can bring us closer, we must remember that all values in the world are inverse in heaven. We are a proud bunch, we think is our will what is important, and lack trust in the Will of God prevailing over all. Christ is the perfect example of going to the mountain in prayer and coming back as a constant pattern.
@nicklausbrain 2 жыл бұрын
The concerns of this man regarding the councils and the ardent pursuit of 'correct definitions' is very much valid. I do not believe that God ever judges men by the allegiance to a men-made formula, however 'correct' it might be. EO church sees these formulas as some sort of achievement, but to me it is more of a tragedy, dividing to body of Christ, truly “the letter kills, but the Spirit gives life”
@GospelSimplicity 2 жыл бұрын
Thanks for sharing your perspective on this!
@dylanarmour6727 Жыл бұрын
Have you visited Anabaptist churches?
@francescogorbechov4192 2 жыл бұрын
Protestants who actually understand church history have to do some serious theological gymnastics to remain Protestant. But if they’re honest with themselves, they realize that either the Catholics or Orthodox are right
@arttyree4504 2 жыл бұрын
If remaining protestant is what is important, yes, that is true. However, if knowing God and obeying Him is our real desire, Scripture is our starting point and ongoing only true Source. See Acts 20.32.
@NavelOrangeGazer 2 жыл бұрын
@@arttyree4504 2 Thessalonians 2:15. Sola scriptura is heresy. Where in scripture is the Canon of scripture listed?
@davidbatten576 2 жыл бұрын
@@NavelOrangeGazer Not sure you understand what sola scriptura is by you using 2 Thess. 2:15 to disprove it. Or by using the biblical table of contents argument. The canon of scripture is created by God and He is the only one that knows for a fact every book written that is inspired. The church has done its best to recognize the canon and the books that are inspired. It is a fallible list of infallible books.
@UltraX34 2 жыл бұрын
Depends. I think you can take church history seriously and be Anglican.
@NavelOrangeGazer 2 жыл бұрын
@@davidbatten576 missed the part where God told Luther to ravage the OT canon 🤣
@tab207 2 жыл бұрын
Very interested, as I’m somewhere in between Mennonites & Orthodox atm
@alexcarson2065 2 жыл бұрын
That is exactly where I was 7 months ago! Keep seeking truth brother, you will find your way. Reading "The Apostolic Fathers", particularly Polycarp, Ignatius, and the Didache really helped me personally.
@GospelSimplicity 2 жыл бұрын
Hope it's helpful!
@stefang.9763 2 жыл бұрын
@@alexcarson2065 So, you stopped seeking the Truth !?
@alexcarson2065 2 жыл бұрын
@@stefang.9763 Quite the opposite, I found the truth faith! The depth of Orthodoxy is unbelievable and I hope one day you are able to experience it.
@stefang.9763 2 жыл бұрын
@@alexcarson2065 I've left eastern orthodoxy because of some their unorthodox teachings. I'm not saying that the few practicing EO christians don't save, but you are focusing on the wrong things. Focus on Christ, the Truth!
@Adam-ue2ig 2 жыл бұрын
Im assuming he doesnt believe in eternal security and he once did. It was the opposite for me, i was once doubtful of the doctrine of assurance and now i believe it fully.
@GospelSimplicity 2 жыл бұрын
That's fascinating!
@Adam-ue2ig 2 жыл бұрын
Please check out Michael Eaton green leaf ministries. He has hundreds of audio sermons and expositions on webpage. Also his book No Condemnation A Theology of Assurance. He passed away in 2017 but his content has been a blessing for years. So much rich theology on Assurance throughout church history!
@Adam-ue2ig 2 жыл бұрын
Its not wholly unknown to the early church and their are dozens of passages not "a few prooftexts".
@Adam-ue2ig 2 жыл бұрын
To Him who is able to keep you from falling and to present you before his glorious presence without fault and with great joy... (Jude 24) ...whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life” (John 3:16) My sheep listen to my voice; I know them, and they follow me. I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish; no-one can snatch them out of my hand (John 10:27-28). And do not grieve the Holy Spirit of God, with whom you were sealed for the day of redemption (Ephesians 4:30) For I am convinced that neither death nor life, neither angels nor demons, neither the present nor the future, nor any powers, neither height nor depth, nor anything else in all creation, will be able to separate us from the love of God that is in Christ Jesus our Lord (Romans 8:38-39).
@Adam-ue2ig 2 жыл бұрын
John 3:36 Whoever believes in the Son has eternal life; whoever does not obey the Son shall not see life, but the wrath of God remains on him. Romans 8:16 The Spirit himself bears witness with our spirit that we are children of God. 1 John 5:13 I write these things to you who believe in the name of the Son of God that you may know that you have eternal life. James 1:12 Blessed is the man who remains steadfast under trial, for when he has stood the test he will receive the crown of life, which God has promised to those who love him. Psalm 23:4 Even though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death, I will fear no evil, for you are with me; your rod and your staff, they comfort me. 1 John 3:14 We know that we have passed out of death into life, because we love the brothers. Whoever does not love abides in death. 1 John 3:22 And whatever we ask we receive from him, because we keep his commandments and do what pleases him. 1 John 5:14 And this is the confidence that we have toward him, that if we ask anything according to his will he hears us. 2 Corinthians 13:5 Examine yourselves, to see whether you are in the faith. Test yourselves. Or do you not realize this about yourselves, that Jesus Christ is in you?-unless indeed you fail to meet the test! 2 Timothy 1:12 Which is why I suffer as I do. But I am not ashamed, for I know whom I have believed, and I am convinced that he is able to guard until that Day what has been entrusted to me. Colossians 2:2 That their hearts may be encouraged, being knit together in love, to reach all the riches of full assurance of understanding and the knowledge of God’s mystery, which is Christ. Ephesians 3:12 In whom we have boldness and access with confidence through our faith in him. Hebrews 10:22 Let us draw near with a true heart in full assurance of faith, with our hearts sprinkled clean from an evil conscience and our bodies washed with pure water. Hebrews 12:28 Therefore let us be grateful for receiving a kingdom that cannot be shaken, and thus let us offer to God acceptable worship, with reverence and awe. Hebrews 6:11 And we desire each one of you to show the same earnestness to have the full assurance of hope until the end. Isaiah 12:2 Behold, God is my salvation; I will trust, and will not be afraid; for the Lord God is my strength and my song, and he has become my salvation. Job 19:25 For I know that my Redeemer lives, and at the last he will stand upon the earth. John 10:28 “I give them eternal life, and they will never perish, and no one will snatch them out of my hand.” John 3:16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life. John 5:24 “Truly, truly, I say to you, whoever hears my word and believes him who sent me has eternal life. He does not come into judgment, but has passed from death to life.” Philippians 1:6 And I am sure of this, that he who began a good work in you will bring it to completion at the day of Jesus Christ. Psalm 42:11 Why are you cast down, O my soul, and why are you in turmoil within me? Hope in God; for I shall again praise him, my salvation and my God. Romans 10:13 For “everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved.” Romans 5:1 Therefore, since we have been justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ. Romans 8:1 There is therefore now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus.
@ignacio.gonzalez.osb_dc 2 жыл бұрын
Excellent interview, as always! Key take-away for me from Bercot's perspective is at 32:33ff -- "They started saying that the Creed was inspired of God. That really bothered me. So now we have another source of authority beyond the Scriptures." I think that's the root of the divisions within Christianity -- Who or what is your authority? For Catholics, our Authority is Jesus Christ who established His Church on Peter, the Apostles and their successors. Jesus Christ, truly present in the Eucharist, is our Authority, not merely the God-breathed written words that tell us about Him. For we are saved by the very Person of Jesus Christ, not merely by an idea about who He is. Thus, Catholics are humbled to have the Person of Christ -- Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity -- in the Eucharist; Protestants, from the outside looking in, only have an idea of Christ from the Scriptures -- God's inspired word written by men, but not God Himself as Catholics have in the Eucharist. And I can't find the point in the interview, but I love where you ask him about the Church in the 1,000+ years between Constantine and Luther. He mentions the sanctity of Francis, but St. Frank was only in the 12th Century. What of St. Benedict who died 210 years after Constantine and 634 years before Francis and 936 years before Luther? Furthermore, what then of the holy monks and nuns who "prayed without ceasing" and preserved the scriptures during the interim between the Fall of Rome and the Reformation? St. Francis, himself, made retreats at the Benedictine monastery of Subiaco -- Benedict's first monastery! Luther wouldn't have had his Bible in the 1500s hundreds of years after Constantine if not for the monks preserving the scriptures for centuries in their monasteries! Finally, is "step aside, Jesus -- I only need what I read about you" the faith of the earliest martyrs who learned the Gospel from those who knew Jesus?
@D.N.. 2 жыл бұрын
The Anabaptist Bruderhoff communities and Hutterites are thriving . Several Bruderhoff communities in US welcome guests for stays to experience their life !
@johnlee6780 2 жыл бұрын
Didn't Luther said of the Anabaptist - "One of us with God and the other is not."
@j.g.4942 2 жыл бұрын
It's 'they are not of the same spirit' (not with the Holy Spirit), but functionally yes. Luther also called them 'enthusiasts' which meant 'the God in me' as opposed to God Almighty, Creator of all.
@NavelOrangeGazer 2 жыл бұрын
A wild didache appears!
@psbb4him 2 жыл бұрын
There are many types of Anabaptists. Some of them are very liberal in their thinking, lining up more with secular liberalism than biblical orthodox teaching.
@ontologicallysteve7765 3 ай бұрын
27:00
@jonathansmith336 Жыл бұрын
Just be aware that many Anabaptists (Mennonites in particular) have gone woke like many mainline Protestant denominations. They have assimilated into mainstream culture and lifestyle. He's probably participating in a group that is on the spectrum closer to the Amish in a simple lifestyle. It's interesting that Amish have bishops with significant authority in their communities, though much of the discipline is as he says is about lifestyle issues. Up until a few decades ago, Mennonites with roots in the early immigrations to America also had bishops and a connectional governance. That is, the bishops had real authority over numerous congregations. Some have postulated that some Anabaptist early formation came from lay monastic movements in the 1500s. Menno Simons was a (had been) Catholic priest who brought some order into a fairly ragged movement.
@oldfarmerboy4158 6 ай бұрын
There is truth in what you say. Mennonite Church USA is very much woke. The Universities, Heston, Goshen, Bluffton have been woke for decades. Large numbers of churches are leaving MCUSA. Ours left probably 10 years ago. There are churches banding together to work in unison. Our joined a group called EVANA network. I don't see MCUSA lasting a whole lot longer. Bishops have little power today if they even exist.
@hinglemccringleberry9494 2 жыл бұрын
As a former Baptist, staying Protestant is the opposite of what I felt comfortable doing once I read the early church writings lol sometimes you just gotta admit you were wrong and it wasn’t even your fault depending on where you were raised.
@alexjurado6029 2 жыл бұрын
It seems like this guest doesn’t understand the the Church is a living organism, that, like any living organism, grows and develops naturally. Doctrine does not change, but it does develop in the way we understand it philosophically.
@IgnatiusEmanuel 2 жыл бұрын
Do you mean we understand it better now than Justin Martyr, Ignatius, Paul, James, and Peter?
@GospelSimplicity 2 жыл бұрын
Perhaps doesn't understand, but perhaps understands that position and disagreess
@arttyree4504 2 жыл бұрын
@@GospelSimplicity Thanks--good observation.
@filiusvivam4315 2 жыл бұрын
Thank you Alex. So true.
@Motomack1042 2 жыл бұрын
Greatest conspiracy theory of all time, " the Catholic church was started by Constantine" problem being many church fathers such as Athanansius were there before and after Constantine and nothing changed in their teaching. While I do appreciate our protestant brothers and sisters love for Jesus and the bible, they cannot in any way justify any connection with the early church unless they attach themselves to heretical groups, like the Gnostics.
@dnaak 2 жыл бұрын
"The Apostasy That Wasn't: The Extraordinary Story of the Unbreakable Early Church" by Rod Bennett is an awesome book on this subject. It's truly inspiring to see the true picture - Bishops coming from the far reaches of the Christian world to make sure the faith was taught and understood as was passed to them by the apostles.
@D.N.. 2 жыл бұрын
@@dnaak Does that book deal with the antisemitism taught by these people? Especially St Cyrostom and his " 8 Sermons against The Jews?"
@permanenceaesthetic6545 2 жыл бұрын
@@D.N.. Chrysostom was absolutely correct about them.
@D.N.. 2 жыл бұрын
@@permanenceaesthetic6545 What was correct about his teaching regards them ?
@codyvandal2860 2 жыл бұрын
@@D.N.. Would you like to know what the Talmud has to say about Christians?
@radepiljov7969 2 жыл бұрын
I am eastern orthodox from Serbia , born in Niš(Naissus) just like the great emperor st.Constantine , and without him christianity never be world spread religion. You can hate him , call a pagan or brutal murderer who corrupt the church, but he is main guy why christians still exist today.
@nicklausbrain 2 жыл бұрын
Your argument makes Christianity not much better than islam, because it simply means that the church cannot succeed without government support and brute force
@OrthodoxJourney359 2 жыл бұрын
Jesus is King, no matter how history played out or could have playing out, the Gospel would have still thrived along with His Church.
@MrFarmboy1888 2 жыл бұрын
No, Christianity had already spread all over the known world a century before Constantine.
@OrthodoxJourney359 2 жыл бұрын
@@MrFarmboy1888 Yes, Paul said that. We are talking about the Whole World . Not just a Preterist standpoint of the first 70 years.
@MrFarmboy1888 2 жыл бұрын
@@OrthodoxJourney359 true. The Gospel is not dependent on kings and emperors.
@cristeromoderno-apologetic112 2 жыл бұрын
knowing that anabaptism is very recent this anabaptist view of chruch history seems to be nothing but historical revisionism twisting history around
@BenjaminEGreenbank Жыл бұрын
That may be but as an anabaptist I recently went to an orthodox church. I was impressed with the reverence in the liturgy and think how they worship God was good. However afterwards I found the vast majority of people were very worldly as soon as they left the sanctuary. What David burcot is saying is largely true it is easier to be a faithful christian hanging out with the mennonites than it is hanging out with the orthodox. As far as the views on violence I do think the anabaptists are closer to the early church but they do take thier pacifism too far. In america it's even worse. The majority of women dont wear head coverings and do wear jewelery and makeup. You can't tell me that the early church was fine with that and expect me to believe it. David burcot's point is lifestyle trumps theology and based on scripture I believe he is right. My point is not that orthodoxy is wrong, but they need to repent and practice what they preach. They need to be a peculiar people in the world rather than blending in.
@cristeromoderno-apologetic112 Жыл бұрын
@@BenjaminEGreenbank how can a church that was invented only 200 years ago be closer to primitive christianity?
@BenjaminEGreenbank Жыл бұрын
@@cristeromoderno-apologetic112 because both churches are 2000 yrs away from when christianity was founded. It is easier to maintain the physical trappings of an organization than it is to maintain the self sacrificial love demanded in the gospel. Theology is easy living a humble self sacrificial life even with Gods help is very hard. It is against our fleshly nature and is the reason the saints of both the orthodox and catholic churches prayed constantly. It's a pity so few of thier members strive for the spiritual life. Because the anabaptists are young they still have the fervor of the convert though it is waning. My experience came from a local orthodox church as is the case for most people who seek orthodoxy. I am not actually speaking about all of orthodoxy though I may have implied that in my previous statement.
@cristeromoderno-apologetic112 Жыл бұрын
@@BenjaminEGreenbank That is a bunch of crap and you know it. It is nothing but an excuse to belong to the apostasy of the latter times. Jesus was clear, if anybody preached a different gospel let him be anathema.
@cristeromoderno-apologetic112 Жыл бұрын
@@BenjaminEGreenbank Jesus said to not let people trap us with vain reasoning like yours. He also said see that you are not deceived because in latter days false preachers would come about. He was talking about people like you. matthew 24:24-27. Your vain argument proved my point.
@wartimemodels 2 жыл бұрын
This guy couldn’t be more wrong about the early understandings of authority. The scriptures weren’t the authority from day 1. They weren’t there. This isn’t to denigrate scripture but to point out the reality that the church was founded at Pentecost and consisted of communities with bishops, and worship, and sacraments, and doctrine, before anything was ever written down, much less formed into a canon. The idea of people in the first, second, third or fourth century flipping through their Bibles is a fantasy. I wager 99% of christians who have ever lived have been illiterate. And icons were always used, and Mary was always understood to be Theotokos. This guy was a conclusion in search of a justification.
@INRIVivatChristusRex 2 жыл бұрын
The Pre- Nicean Church was the Catholic Church with the Bishop of Rome as the vicar of Our Lord JesusChrist. God bless🙏🏻
@wartimemodels 2 жыл бұрын
@@INRIVivatChristusRex Incorrect. God bless.
@nathanhornok 2 жыл бұрын
Yeah, he equates "what the apostles taught" with "new testament scripture" as a one to one correspondence. Not recognizing that there are Apostolic teachings that were oral tradition, and are not found in the 27 books of the NT. I'm assuming he's read Saint Basil's "On the Holy Spirit" chapter 27, where Basil explains the reason for the "extra biblical" Apostolic teaching at great length. But I guess his "sola scriptura" presupposition is too strong for him to let what Saint Basil said to really sink in.
@larainehruby1376 2 жыл бұрын
Weren’t the first Christians Jews (nowadays called Messianic)? They didn’t read or write English and we discuss these matters as if they did! Respectfully, because I have read Mr Bercot’s books and took great inspiration to seek truth outside the Catholic Church when I left, BUT the Kingdom of this world is ruled by the enemy of GOD, and that’s been true since BEFORE the Fall. Isn’t that Bible’s teaching?
@arttyree4504 2 жыл бұрын
Yes, looks like you are dealing with the real issues.
@TheEmmaLucille 2 жыл бұрын
I think most of the comments miss the point that David is not condemning the non Anabaptists churches as "unchristian". His main point is to say that the (then unique) Church lost its way when it became "official" (NOT all the individual Christians as he recognizes that there is sincere Christians in all kind of churches whatever their creed) and, sadly, history proves it to be true.
@GospelSimplicity 2 жыл бұрын
Thanks for the nuance!
@johnathanrhoades7751 2 жыл бұрын
The big thing here is how you think of Sola Scriptura vs Holy Tradition...
@GospelSimplicity 2 жыл бұрын
Fair
@conorjones6212 2 жыл бұрын
It's interesting to hear his perspective, though I'm not still not sure how he's able to reconcile the focus on lifestyle while relying also so heavily on his focus on the scriptures. The Bible as a document wouldn't have been fully assembled really until the years where he stated that he saw the Church turn, and even then who was it that decided how to layout the Bible anyways, but the very people he begins to critique. I'm rather doubtful that at any moment in the first 250 years of Christians one community ever had a full assortment of the documents that would later become the Bible, so they would've relied heavily on the traditions either directly taught by the Apostles or passed down in the course of only 2-4 generations. Another point could be that I believe it was Paul spent 9 months teaching every day in one of the cities he later wrote a letter to, and I think you could easily come to the conclusion that not everything he taught in those 9 months would've been conveyed in a small letter.
@Jimmy-iy9pl 2 жыл бұрын
The church always had apostolic instruction in the form of the four Gospels and Paul's letters. Fidelity to God's word was their standard of orthodoxy. And it's not improbable that at least some churches kept the 27 book NT canon that we currently have. Origen of Alexandria probably knew the 27 book canon and received it as the commonly held canon of his day and he was born in the late second century AD.
@alexcarson2065 2 жыл бұрын
@@Jimmy-iy9pl He is referring to the modern protestant Canon of scripture, which did not get compiled until the second half of the 4th century. This reality really damages his claims, as he would have to believe the people he claims went so astray somehow produced an infallible set of documents through the holy spirit, while simultaneously not listening to the holy spirit in their lives. Simply put, without the physical church post 325ad, he wouldn't have what he knows as "The Bible" to claim as authoritative.
@conorjones6212 2 жыл бұрын
@@Jimmy-iy9pl Well to get super technical there was a point in the church's life where they didn't have the four gospels or Pauls letters. On a timeline roughly, Jesus was crucified in AD 33, and the first gospel (Mark) wasn't written till somewhere AD 50-60 same as Matthew. Before that there was James (44-49ish), and Galatians (49-50). 1st and 2nd Thessalonians wasn't till 51-52 AD. That creates a rather significant time gap of nearly 50 years (to include the last gospel of John) where they didn't have the core 4 and letters in full. On an operative level of 17ish years however for the partial grouping, there was no scripture to reference. All they had to rely on was the tradition they were instructed in on the missionary journeys of the apostles, Paul, and others. Whenever this is talked about I always like to imagine timescales in reference to my own life. 17 years ago I was still in kindergarten, so to me 17 years is a long time relatively for Christians to be spreading and living the faith without any amount of scripture to reference. Hence why I have a hard time understanding how he'd be able to reconcile on an objective standard the need to have what he views as the surefire guide for what early christians lived like. To coincide, the last gospel (John) wasn't written till AD 80-90, so by the time it was written I think it would be good to sit and wonder how it was then distributed around the Christian world. On a physical level it would've taken it at least a couple days to be copied by someone, then perhaps a month or two to be shared to another community, so on so on. I'd say its completely fair for some of the early Christians to have possibly contained all of the books or letters once they were written, but to stretch the timeline to it's limit (96 AD Revelations), which pushes it around 1/3 of the time he references as Early Christianity. Not to mention there are four letters of Paul they theorize they may have lost due to references in his other letters, so to put it all in perspective it would appear the letters were never intended exactly to be the Sola Sciptura he alludes to here especially if there were more letters that were lost. Plus like @Alex Carson said without the physical church it wouldn't have been confirmed as canon anyways for nearly 200 years, not to mention there were many other books floating around that may have been considered before that confirmation as semi authoritative before not being included.
@brothertonykjv 2 жыл бұрын
"We don't speak great things - We live them." (Marcus Minucius Felix, 2nd century).
@antoniaschiffer4958 2 ай бұрын
I guess this means the early church had everything right? I am not so sure of that.
@alexjurado6029 2 жыл бұрын
There was never an Ecumenical Council that addressed Sabellianism???? First Constantinople in 381?????
@GospelSimplicity 2 жыл бұрын
Prior to Nicaea, is I believe what he meant
@glorytogodforallthings8448 2 жыл бұрын
You don’t have to be anabaptist to be saved but we’re called to walk on the same narrow path to be saved🤔
@elvisisacs3955 2 жыл бұрын
Christ is the narrow path not an institution that developed out of the universal Church Christ established.
@preachtruth8927 2 жыл бұрын
What Holy Scripture has said Christ's Church would be: How Christ's Church has conformed to Holy Scripture: It will be founded by GOD: Psalms 127:1, Matthew 16:18 It was founded by GOD. It will be highly visible: Isaiah 2:2, Matthew 5:14 It is highly visible. It will have the authority: Matthew 18:15-18, John 20:21-22 It has the authority given to it by Jesus Christ. It will have a Father Figure: Isaiah 22:20-25 It has a Father Figure, as GOD always had for His people. It will be a Theocracy and not a Democracy: Eph 5:23-24 It is a Theocracy. It is governed from the top down. The blueprint for it is described in the book of Acts. It is blueprinted in the book of Acts. It will have priests, deacons, Bishops: Acts 6:1-6,14:22,20:28 It always has had priests, deacons, and Bishops. It will have Apostolic Succession: Psalm 109:8, Acts 1:20-26 It has Apostolic Succession. It will offer sacrifice every day in every place: Malachi 1:11 It does offer sacrifice every day in every place. It will be guided by the Holy Spirit: John 14:16-17, 16:12-13 It is guided by the Holy Spirit: Acts 15:28, Rev 2:7 Truths of GOD to be revealed to it over time: John 16:12-13 Truths of GOD have been revealed to it over time: Eph 3:10 It will be the Pillar and Foundation of Truth: 1Timothy 3:15 It is the Pillar and Foundation of Truth. It will be the guardian of truth: 2Timothy 1:13-14 It has been the guardian of truth for almost 2000 years. It will uphold Apostolic Tradition: 2Thessalonians 2:15 It upholds Apostolic Tradition. It will have Church councils: Proverbs 11:14, Acts 15:1-29 It holds periodic Church councils: Acts 15:1-29 It will be attacked from the inside: John 6:70 It has been attacked from the inside. It will be attacked from the outside: Matthew 5:10-12, 10:22 It has been attacked from the outside. All who fight against it shall be confounded: Isaiah 41:11 37,000+ Protestant sects is proof that they are confounded. It will be found in every century: Ephesians 3:21 It is found in every century from the day Christ founded it. It will last forever: Isa 41:10-11, 54:17, 59:21, Matt 28:20 It is still with us today from the day in which He founded it. There is only one Church in the entire world which matches all of the Scriptural requirements as listed above. Can your sect match even one of those requirements? That's very simplistic. In my view, to believe in Jesus is to believe He existed, He's the Son of God and God in the flesh, never sinned, is our only savior and He did and say things in truth out of LOVE, NECESSITY AND with a PURPOSE. That said, we have to look closely to his deeds, particularly about establishing a Church. Why did He instituted such a thing? What was the necessity for that and the purpose? So that we don't ever loose sight of his true teachings. And what did His Church taught? Well, all we have to do is analyse all the primitive documents from the first centuries and come to the conclusion what Church today teaches the same things as the early church (and there's only one that corresponds: the Catholic Church). In conclusion: to believe in Christ is to believe and hold fast to His Church. To believe in Christ and reject His established Church is a dichotomy/contradiction. Even Christ identifies Himself with his Church (Acts 9:4; 22:7; Lk 10:16; 1Tim.3:15).
@davidbolt9566 2 жыл бұрын
Paul does say the Church is a pillar and buttress of the truth, but isn't that sort of just begging the question. Your assuming that the truth is quickly and easily discerned and that we just gotta see who has it. Between the Catholic and the Orthodox it is certainly not obvious to me, my friend!
@davidbolt9566 2 жыл бұрын
@Brian Farley Idk man, theres a lot of people who know that history pretty well and still choose Orthodoxy. I dont think its very clear whose the real thing. History gets pretty murky at times. Feels like you could potentially be setting up a straw-man.
@davidbolt9566 2 жыл бұрын
@Brian Farley Right believers were called Catholic and Catholic means 'universal' but retaining an official title is not necessarily a trump card, the word Orthodox means 'right opinion'. But just because they have that title does not mean they actually hold right opinion.
@davidbolt9566 2 жыл бұрын
@Brian Farley Also if we wanted to talk about Doctrines not being aligned with one another im skeptical of a lot of stuff in Catholicism on that front. But im sure you could explain them. Even with the Bible people can 'find contradictions' but that doesnt mean there actually are.
@stephengriffin4612 2 жыл бұрын
I believe that Jesus said He would send the Holy Spirit to be with the Church until the end of time. When exactly did Jesus rescind this promise?
@GospelSimplicity 2 жыл бұрын
I don't think he would disagree that Christ is still with the church. The difference is, it would seem, you two would define the church differently
@stephengriffin4612 2 жыл бұрын
@@GospelSimplicity That is too glib a response. The early church, be it Catholic or Orthodox, was the Church established by Jesus. There was no other other church. The question is still unanswered as to when the protection and direction of the Holy Spirit was removed.
@duenstorm 2 жыл бұрын
Taking the position that the Church is in error, because they didn't use the exact words of scripture, even though it conveys the same message is schizophrenic. It also completely hinges on Sola Scriptura, which is definitely not a doctrine found anywhere in the early Church.
@GospelSimplicity 2 жыл бұрын
Schizophrenic is not a proper adjective to describe a view with which you disagree. Also, he didn't say that the word was erroneous. He just said it shouldn't be mandated or put on par with Scripture.
@boochparadise 2 жыл бұрын
@@GospelSimplicity Which given the fact scripture as we know it today comes from the council he's criticizing for not following it, is a bit nuts.
@duenstorm 2 жыл бұрын
@@GospelSimplicity You're right he didn't, he said the Church was in error for using different wording than scripture. He still judged the behavior of the Church on the assumption of Sola Scriptura. Even though claming he had packed away all his biases. How can you judge church history correctly, when you view everything through the lens of the reformation? Of course you'll stay protestant at that point.
@glorytogodforallthings8448 2 жыл бұрын
It is easy to judge what others have done 1000+ years later when they can’t physically defend themselves, right?! Didn’t Jesus say that God doesn’t desire death of a sinner but that they return and repent? And wasn’t the thief on the cross the first one to enter the kingdom of God because he repented at the last hour? How can we sit here today and judge the actions of others when we today sin worse? We are all sinners in thoughts and deeds, God is the only judge! His prophets were sinners, look at David, but God still worked through them. Righteousness is not what is acceptable to us, but what God judges it to be. Let Constantine Rest In Peace, I am sure he knew he wasn’t perfect.
@evans3922 2 жыл бұрын
He is St.Constatine the Great and Equevalent to the Apostles not a plain Costantine
@glorytogodforallthings8448 2 жыл бұрын
@@evans3922 Amin 🙏 St. Constantine pray for us!
@arttyree4504 2 жыл бұрын
@@evans3922 "St." Constantine was a pagan. Long after his alleged "conversion" he was still making offerings to his favorite pagan temple. Of course identifying as a "Christian" gave him the backing of a nascent religious empire--which was what he really wanted.
@evans3922 2 жыл бұрын
@@arttyree4504 He was the emperor who let free the christian religion and his Mother St.Helen found the Holy Cross of our Lord Jesus Christ in Jerusalem and founded many churhces on the Holy Land..like the Holy Sepulchre and many other ones...The whole christian world ows him the most...he was baptised just before his death and is a saint in Orthodox Church..
@sophiagomez5619 2 жыл бұрын
YOU CUT YOUR HAIR
@stefang.9763 2 жыл бұрын
Some of you guys really need to visit eastern Europe and take the bad taste of what eastern orthodoxy is producing in those places. What does it help you to brag about having the "perfect" doctrine when most of your people are in darkness ? Millions of so called eastern orthodoxs that in some way are participating(!!) for decades to the eastern orthodox rituals, don't have a basic understanding who Jesus Christ is and that He did die for our sins and only in His Name we have salvation . According to one friend of mine who is an eastern orthodox priest, an internal orthodox statistic in Romania shows that practicing EO christians are between 4% and 16% - with emphasis on the lower percent he said. Unless they were in seminary or belong to a eastern orthodox "reformed" branch - most of these remaining ~10% still don't have basic scriptural knowledge. Sadly and ironically, because they are in the EO church institution, they never heard or will hear about the "monarchy of the father".
@cop2998 2 жыл бұрын
I'm not orthodox but with all due respect this comment is seriously ignorant. Eastern Europe is first of all many different countries have you honestly ever been there? I have and I also have never meet a single person who bragged about having the "perfect" doctrine. You can go to places in Serbia, Georgia (the country), Greece and literally have strangers invite you into their homes. Some of the friendliest people their. I also doubt you have ever been to Romania. A survey recently came out showing that 68% of Romanians pray everyday it is a highly religious country and i have never encountered any Romanian who bragged or anything. On the contrary i have been called a cannibalistic follower of demonic catechisms by Americans from USA because I grew up as a lutheran christian and therefore believe in the real presence of the eucharist. And i have had these types of insults thrown at me not once but multiple times always from americans who have been in my personal experience, the most hostile christians i have encountered. Should i now go ahead and judge the whole country of the USA like you judge not just a country but almost half a continent saying they don't even have a basic understanding of who Christ is? What do you even base that on? Do you have any idea what they had to go through during the communist times? How many christians in these countries who dedicated their lives to feed people, to protect people. How people in Romania sometimes had to baptize their children in secret, how priest were tortured by the atheist regime and how many people died for their faith in these times as martyrs? Your comment is the most disrespectful one i have read today
@stefang.9763 2 жыл бұрын
@@cop2998 Unfortunately you speak from theory and wikipedia, while I speak from the reality I've been living in. I was born in Romania, I went to school in that country, I went to university in that country, I had several different jobs in different domains in that country. I lived under the communism in that country. Shall I tell you how many practicing EO christians I've encountered ? It is very sad and I am not happy, but rather cry about this. And I cry even more when I see how easy some are ignoring this reality. Trying to shame me, while completely disrespecting my opinion is enough telling and I will refrain from qualifying you or your words more than I did. Unfortunately what I've said is the sad reality of Eastern Europe and Orthodoxy. Yes, I am speaking first about my country. And, yes, they are bragging a lot about having the ultimate truth - it's all over the place in internet/youtube. Or you have to live in Romania to get a taste of this.
@eliasn.477 2 жыл бұрын
@@stefang.9763 lol should Romanians act and talk like the sectarians in order to pass the test? By orthodoxy’s standard they are orthodox enough . But I do agree with you that many Americans looking for more exotic religions would benefit from a trip to EE, it would disabuse them of some misconceptions: namely that orthodoxy works best as a majority, cultural religion rather than a proselytizing sect always trying to outsmart the Protestants or the Catholics.
@bonniejohnstone 2 жыл бұрын
This is a sad comment when you look at the insane condition of Evangelical Christianity in America! People are leaving in droves for traditional Christianity, Pentecostal sects, Buddhism, atheism. The only place Christianity isn’t decreasing in the World (losing people) is in the Southern Hemisphere. Places like Africa! There, all of Christianity, including Orthodoxy, is BOOMING!!! Glory to God!
@eliasn.477 2 жыл бұрын
@@bonniejohnstone there isn’t much Orthodoxy in the Southern Hemisphere I’m afraid. But even though they may be collapsing at home, evangelicals still make converts in the global south and even Eastern Europe. God knows, there are more ex orthodox turned evangelicals there than there are American converts to orthodoxy. Another thing is the birth rate in Orthodox countries is abysmal.
@Xenotypal 2 жыл бұрын
Can someone give me a good reason not to convert to Orthodoxy? I'm struggling here.
@Basil_in_the_Wild 2 жыл бұрын
Current Chatecumen here, and that doesn’t exist haha
@Xenotypal 2 жыл бұрын
@@Basil_in_the_Wild seemingly not as no one has replied lol (I kid). But really though I love the much more spiritual way of thinking in the Orthodox church.
@Basil_in_the_Wild 2 жыл бұрын
@@Xenotypal not only that but I’ve found that the way I see all of reality has dramatically shifted
@Xenotypal 2 жыл бұрын
@@Basil_in_the_Wild are you a former protestant? one of the things I like about orthodoxy is their very different worldview.
@alexanderderus2087 2 жыл бұрын
Converted from baptist to Orthodox officially with my wife and baby 4 months ago! Took about 4 years and tons of reading. It’s even better once you are in!!
@paynedv 2 жыл бұрын
Catholicism.
@ignatiusl.7478 2 жыл бұрын
"Lifestyle trumps theology"? He is sadly very very mistaken. True Orthodoxy leads to true Orthopraxy. His analysis of the Fathers of Nicea is scandalous and totally ignorant of who these men were. Many were confessors and ALL survived the emperial persecution! How dare he slander them. You should have gently pressed him on that point Austin.
@christopheraaronbaker 2 жыл бұрын
Yeah that’s a very Protestant view. Let me worship and do things my way. No harm no foul just not living in the truth of the church. This isn’t really a context for pressing folks on points but point taken.
@ignatiusl.7478 2 жыл бұрын
@@christopheraaronbaker I respectfully disagree. I think it's a Christian duty. But it takes skill to do it well.
@johnjay7255 2 жыл бұрын
The Bible says to wear blue-buttoned shirts, right?
@gwan_git 2 жыл бұрын
Pretty sure it's in Corinthians
@SoundFaithChannel 2 жыл бұрын
What does it say to wear?
@gwan_git 2 жыл бұрын
I was joking
@SoundFaithChannel 2 жыл бұрын
@@gwan_git 😂
@johnpaulhumphrey2981 2 жыл бұрын
"And God said, "Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters." Sounds like a blue shirt to me, especially when you dig into the Hebrew word for firmament. The button part will take a little more exigesis, but I think a thorough study of Ezekiel will provide ample proof texts. Since it divides, and a buttoned shirt must be buttoned together, and firmaments are blue as everyone knows, so there you go straight Bible truth, I am going to have to get my blue-buttoned shirt now...
@johnjay7255 2 жыл бұрын
Did he imply that "ancient" Churches have tossed the Beatitudes?
@IgnatiusEmanuel 2 жыл бұрын
Where did you hear that? Please provide a time stamp thanks.
@dylanarmour6727 7 ай бұрын
Yes
@jjmulvihill 4 ай бұрын
There is a third leg on deciding a congregation. The Bible itself. If the practices of the PreNicene deny the Bible, why mimic them? Errant tradition ain’t good. Their writings are a resource for perspective, but not doctrine. I like a comment of anther below that mentions the Holy Spirit. Good call when searching for answers.
@jackcarson9046 10 ай бұрын
“The early Christians wouldn’t have agreed with this because it doesn’t match my idea of the early Christians”
@someguyoverthere3275 2 жыл бұрын
I do not see the value of perpetuating the lies that have shaped parts of western Christianity. The speaker POUNDS the false drum of Constantine's directives within Church Councils. Iturgical worship, sacrements and Icons and inscense, and Trinitarian doctrine AND synoptics, The Book of Saint John and apostolic letters were all known and in common practice AT CHURCH long before Constantine. The speaker in the video perpetuates MYTHOLOGY about the actual Church before 312 A.D. ...Protestantism did not "make corrections" it has mostly thrown the baby out with the bathwater. The religion is not about the book. Reading and talking about the book is not worship. Pay attention to HOW Jesus structured the church. It has been around all this time because of it.
@jg7923 2 жыл бұрын
The Early Church did Not bow to and kiss pictures.
@someguyoverthere3275 2 жыл бұрын
@@jg7923 Icons of the people in the New Testament were in early use. St. Luke wrote the first Icon. For those that doubt this, compare it to the fresco and encaustic portraiture examples we have that span all of the 1st century. You will see. And we see Icons in use at Duro Europos- both of Jesus as the Good Shepherd and Mary. Her Icon bears the stars on her clothing that represent the star of Bethlehem. The same pTterns are in use today. These are like family portraits and they always have very advanced theology represented. Icons go ALL the way back. The way the sacred Names were written in our earliest papyrus examples are used in Icons to this day. THIS is something the fragmented churches of the west STILL do not notice. IF I didn't just point it out to you, you would STILL be ignorant of it. So, yes, Iconographers DID see those manuscripts and DID have to get the sacred names recorded properly. There were rules about it even then. ....you don't even notice the images described in the Tabernacle- Or the Temple. ....and you don't even notice that the Desciples CONTINUED to worship GOD as before, in the Temple even AFTER the Resurection and ascension of Jesus. Jesus stripped the authority out of the leadership of the temple. The pattern of worship was not removed. Apostolic Authority is linked through the centuries by laying on of hands and the names of the Bishops are recorded- ALL THE WAY BACK. ...Christianity is not a religion of academic excercises. It is a living body. And it is best if you are in it. GOD makes a way. But don't turn away from truth because it doesn't fit with how you FEEL about it. It is the Truth that HIS Church is STILL here. ... blindness about this is mere willfulness not to see what HE made. It is the oldest, continuous form of human govornance in history. And it is only that way because Jesus made it. Surely evennyou can see this.
@jg7923 2 жыл бұрын
@@someguyoverthere3275 No they did Not bow to and kiss paintings in the early Church.
Gospel Simplicity
Рет қаралды 57 М.
Anabaptist Perspectives
Рет қаралды 8 М.
Poly Holy Yow Spanish
Рет қаралды 26 МЛН
Anabaptist Perspectives
Рет қаралды 4 М.
Strength to Strength
Рет қаралды 3,1 М.
Gospel Simplicity
Рет қаралды 22 М.
МайяОК
Рет қаралды 4,3 МЛН