Lol

Nahh Fr

This drawing is literally what I think when I hear "reformed"

bald zoomar

Don’t cry

Alot of them are more just culturally christian than actually christian tbh

I'm an athiest but I grew up in very religious households so I feel like I can try and explain this one People tend to look at religion for a guide. A way of thinking, a list of morals, a sense of community, etc. It's nice for those people to grow through those ideologies and to believe in a god and have something to work for in their lives. The reason why they may lean more to the liberal side of the spectrum may just be because believe in everything the church has to say, including the negative, may just be uncomfortable for them if they have family or people they care about who may be negatively affected by those beliefs. They could also just not know every detail that comes with being Christian and would instead of seeking salvation for themselves, use Christianity and the community behind it to create a better, more accepting world for their family, even if it may border on what is widely known in more dedicated Christian ideologies as heresy

The problem is, some people just want to be religious without feeling restricted i.e. they want to have their cake and eat it. I wouldn't take this as far as to say that any Christian who goes against their faith in minor ways isn't a real Christian (masturbation, looking at horoscope readings, greedily overeating) because there are very few people who cannot sin at all and some sins are clearly much worse than others (murder, theft, torture), but if someone's going to the point of declaring that a particular act isn't a sin at all then to me, that reflects a lack of integrity on their part. Those kinds of people need to properly reflect on why they feel bad about some aspect of their own faith, then abandon it if they can't resolve their cognitive dissonance. However, I accept that might not be possible in very conservative environments where people would be treated as outcasts or even persecuted if they did that.

@@j1233191 The biggest one for me, is all of the interpretations on gender identity and especially sexuality... they just feel so wrong. How can a loving God judge his creations for loving each other, regardless of their gender identity or orientation? I definitely don't believe God would ever condone any destructive or non-consensual, nor overtly lustful activity (the very reasons for the destruction of S&G). I just have a really hard time believing that they would condone consensual love. I want to ask the really conservative people how they think God would interpret an A-sexual, same sex couple? Because technically that wouldn't be violating any scripture I can think of, since there is zero sexual interaction going on there. So is that still going against God's rules?

​​@@thebarbaryghostsf You kind of seem like one of the stage 3 progressives that RZ talked about - I'll go through your points one by one. 1) There are different kinds of things that we English speakers call "love", love is a very vague term in our language. It could refer to familial love, friendly love, compassionate love (i.e. loving God and your neighbour as yourself) and erotic passion (performing sexual acts on someone or something.) Would it make sense to say that a rapist or a stalker fuelled with erotic passion "loves" their target? No, and it most certainly wouldn't make sense to say that a paedophile or a zoophile "loves" children or animals either. The typical prostitute user doesn't really "love" the one whose services they're using, and I think we can agree on all those things. Compassionate love is vastly more important than any other kind of love in God's eyes, Jesus did imply that people must prefer him to even their own parents or siblings. 2) The Sodomites weren't simply overly lustful - they did engage in a variety of sins as listed by a variety of Biblical writers, but it was mentioned by Jude in the New Testament that they "practiced unnatural vice". Considering that lying with a man as with a woman is spoken of as being an abomination in the Pentateuch and the early Christians were originally a Jewish sect, it's obvious what this is a reference to. Read Romans 1:26-27 for a more explicit description of homosexuality as being unnatural. 3) The idea of anything being OK if it's consensual is moral minimalism. It's a secular, intention-based utilitarian idea that goes directly against the deontological, act-based ethics of Christianity that seek to promote moral maximalism - Jesus himself said "Be perfect, just as your Heavenly Father is perfect". Using prostitutes and having casual sex can also be consensual, but I doubt you'd agree so passionately with those specific things, all because they're not emotionally charged issues or seen as things to be positively affirmed (except in the ultra-liberal Netherlands, but that's another story...) in the way that LGBT matters are. 4) If a same sex couple doesn't actually engage in sex, why are they even in a relationship to begin with? What's the point of forming that kind of bond with someone if you're not going to consummate it? "Asexual" and "same sex couple" are mutually contradictory, if they're not engaging in erotic activities including kissing, then they'd be better off staying single and relating to each other as just friends. St Paul himself said that husbands and wives must only abstain from sex for limited amounts of time in case the devil exploits their lack of self-control and he also said that if anyone burns with lust, they should marry. So it's clear from this that you can't cleanly separate sex from romantic relationships in general. In conclusion, I'd say that you need to consider whether you would give in and say that prostitution or casual sex or other kinds of sexual sins aren't sins or at least aren't that bad if the people engaging in them had become increasingly influential, prominent and accepted in the same way that people who have sex with the same sex did. If you say "no", then you're being a hypocrite and not giving all people who engage in consensual sex the same treatment. If you say "yes", then like RZ pointed out, you're just becoming increasingly distant from essential Christian doctrine like progressives in general.

Yes. This is a good way of putting it. There are numerous other ideas that would fall into this video's first three levels of "progressive" Christianity that can also be very much based on a Biblical foundation. I think Redeemed Zoomer, being a bit more on the conservative side, may not be as aware of how that can be the case for some things.

This video is conservative bullshit

generally agree. I grew up in a church with a woman pastor, and we have always been a literal Bible believing creationist church. we found positions in scripture to match these positions from the get-go, not as an excuse to make things more fair.

Women should not be pastors, priests, or leading churches. Timothy 2:12 is clear. Picking and choosing what we bring forward into modern times subverts that the Bible is the infallible Word of God. When we try manipulating it with mental gymnastics, we enter into disobedience and, yes, even heresy. The Bible claims to be infallible in 2 Peter 1:19, “We also have the prophetic message as something completely reliable.” Peter continues with a description of how Scripture came to be: “No prophecy of Scripture came about by the prophet’s own interpretation of things. For prophecy never had its origin in the human will, but prophets, though human, spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit” (2 Peter 1:20-21). Also, we see infallibility implied in 2 Timothy 3:16-17, “All Scripture is God-breathed” and has the effect of producing servants of God who are “thoroughly equipped for every good work.” The fact that God “breathed” Scripture insures that the Bible is infallible, for God cannot breathe out error. The fact that the Bible equips God’s servants “thoroughly” for service shows that it guides us into truth, not error.

​@psychiatricallyinclined I believe that you are mistaken, and reading things in the way that you do is potentially dangerous in terms of the actions it may lead one to take. First of all, what do you think about the Pharisees? They knew the law extremely well, and tended to take it quite literally. Yet, Jesus proved that they were interpreting things in the wrong way or with the wrong spirit on numerous occasions. Jesus Himself contradicted literal interpretations from the Torah, for example when He allowed his disciples to eat without first cleaning their hands. There is also reason to believe that Paul is speaking to a specific historical and geographical context when he says that women should not lead. Paul is quite egalitarian for his time, even saying that there is no difference between slave and master, male and female, etc. in the eyes of God, and telling husband and wife that they are each other's property sexually, as opposed to the man ruling the woman. It is true that it can be dangerous to interpret scripture to fit your own view, but the Bible's infallibility does not prohibit context. In fact, removing context simply to take it as it is creates many contradictions and leads to many misinterpretations. Some of the people whose opinions I trust the least are people who constantly insist that scripture is "clear" on issues that have caused great controversy within the church. There is usually a reason for that controversy. Sometimes conservatives have it right, and sometimes liberals do, and sometimes they are both wrong. But if it's not widely accepted, dismissing it as "clear," and claiming that the other side is just "leaning on their own understanding," suggests a lack of true consideration of the point. Which I suppose is understandable, since in your perspective, there is no reason to try to interpret anything. But I would suggest that you strongly reconsider that perspective. I wonder how many people have been needlessly driven away from the church because of it? I suspect quite a lot.

This is difficult to agree with because of things like women’s suffrage and civil rights in the church. Things have changed and the majority of conservatives now agree that those things are good, but back years ago, many conservative Christians didn’t. Progressivism has moved its way through conservatives too

Being “conservative” is too dependent on the culture, modern Christianity is practiced much differently than that of the Christianity following Jesus. Maybe the book never changed but your interpretation of the book was given to you by a cultural context that is radically different to that of other eras of history. For instance the acceptance of racism in the mainstream American church to the strong convictions opposing racism in modern day America in the mainstream church. Bottom line being culturally conservative doesn’t mean you defend the bible more closely, just a particular cultural perspective and context of the bible. This is evidenced by proliferation of denominations all claiming to be “biblical”.

have you heard of the entirety of the bible? like between new testament and old testament almost everything changed significantly

Well many "progressive" interpretations are not actually changes to the Bible but are in response to a more accurate reading of the Bible in historical context or in some cases correcting mistranslations. A lot of the most inflammatory words in the Bible: "fornication", "abomination", "sodomy" are mistranslations, that do not accurately reflect the original meaning of the text.

​@@Grokford got any greek and hebrew to back up your claims?

Ya, reading the Bible made me Atheist! If any in the Christian cult read the Bible, we wouldn’t have the issues we have today……

​@Ex_christianAm As Karl Barth explained, since you are not saved, you just read the Human aspect of the Bible, but the Hole Spirit did not revealed the Divine aspect.

​@@Ex_christianthis name and account looks like it was made by reddit atheists.

@@Ex_christianoh a typical troll, go back to your bridge

@@pedroguimaraes6094 there is no Devine aspect. That’s why you need faith, faith in make believe, because none of it is real. Otherwise, if it is real and there is a god, he’s a dick!

Sorry for asking: What is YEC?

@@leusher9024 Young-earth Creation. Basically, the Earth is roughly six thousand years old, dinosaurs lived alongside humans, etc. It's based on the assumption that that the first eleven chapters of the Book of Genesis were intended as history rather than allegory or epic.

I understand the spectrum is supposed to be a simplification but it's definitely evangelical protestant centric

Most Church Fathers took Genesis as literally and were not YEC. There is alternative ideas as to how the days were 6 literal days and the eslapsing of time between Genesis events @@gunsgalore7571

I mean the Big Bang was theorized by a Catholic priest

Jesus is an ethnonationalist. St. Paul was too, for that matter.

Considering Jesus wasn't a christian at all, I would assume he would be no where on the spectrum.

​@@cx9082nah he believed he was God.

I am very sure he believed he existed.

How? He wanted to save everyone, treated everyone fair, and even spoke against that. Like in the parable with the Good Samaritan, or how God said to the Israelites in Leviticus they treat any foreign person well, regardless of ethnicity, because they were foreigners n Egypt. He makes a point so many times that everyone is equal because we all sin, he never mistreated someone because he was perfect. He loved all of everyone because he created them. If Jesus can't because though he was fully man, he was still fully God, and it is impossible for God to sin because it goes against his very being.

While denomination exclusivism may be dogma, I don’t think it’s a widely held belief among individual Catholics.

@@walterbackgammon8436 someone who disagree with catholic dogma has no business calling themselves catholic.

agree. video seems to fall short in that aspect.

@@Gaius453 ask the German bishops that.

@@Gaius453 I would disagree. Suppose you do agree with 95% of Catholic dogma but question or are unsure about the other 5%? What then would you refer to yourself as? Not Orthodox. Not Protestant. Something else? Idk. Those are my thoughts, would love to hear yours.

That’s surprising to hear because practically every Christian I’ve met, regardless of where they are on the scale, will strongly defend their point of view and always call the other objectively wrong I say this as a Christian, Christians never encourage you to have your own point of view.

@@torpid5092 I think it kinda helps that my mom grew up Lutheran before converting to Catholic and my grandfather a die hard Catholic didn't mind. So I kinda got a mix of Christian teaching. And the reverend of my church was just a very kind and respectful man. Again with the whole number thing as I did find some of my notes. He claimed we don't know how they measured time. So these people who lived to be 200 years old may have very well been that old or it just means something different. That's just one example. But yeah I do just kinda vibe in the middle

​​@@torpid5092idk what kinda Christians you met but my pastor is always asking for different opinions so that we can compare and search for the right answer. But my pastor came to the same thing, we were discussing the possible meanings because of the verse that says 1 day to God is like 1000 years to us and 1000 years is like 1 day. We know he made it for sure, it says it right there. But we also gotta consider the fact that God isn't bound by time and he made our time possible. Then again, I'm pretty young and the church is small so we get more time to really discuss. Might be different in other places.

"that God creating the world in 6 days could be literal, or something different." I take that view too, but I think evolution is a farce since the math is bad. I've not seen much of this view, but basically I have suspicions young earth is correct, but think the Bible doesn't demand it and "the science" can't study it.

Here me out, leave the Catholic Church, I know people who have went through it and it sound like almost a cult, try and build a relationship with Jesus, not just be part of a religion

Ethnonationalists do rip out sections of their bible to make their theology work.

@zfloyd1627 does that even exist in the USA? The only Ethnonationalists I ever hear of are those black liberation movement but 1) they are too small in number to have a significant impact and 2) usually Muslims so I doubt they have any use for a Bible of any kind 😄

It’s a made up book by human beings…what difference does it make?

@@zfloyd1627 yeah but at that point, are they conservative? i thought being conservative means adhering to the original traditions. ethnonationalism was not that.

gee, i wonder why 🤡

So is your God the one who slaughtered the first born of Egypt or the one who ordered his people to enact laws that required women who were raped to be sold to their rapist? Oh! Maybe the version of God who sent literal bears to kill the children who joked about the prophet Elisha's bald head? That version is fun. Real comic book villain that one.

Absolutely! Amen!✝

There's no place for Christianity, Islam, or other fairy tale religions in the 21st century, they hold back scientific and social progress and need to be called out for what they are - wishful thinking and delusions.

I vary from a 0.5 on liberal scale to a 0.5 on the conservative scale. I respect conservative beliefs, although I stop really agreeing at stage 3 conservatism because at that point it’s just denying science and more of a cult than an actual religion. For liberalism, I think stage 2 is the max I can tolerate. Anything beyond stage 3 is not true Christianity.

Amen! I haven't wore two different fabrics simultaneously in years! Plus, it saved me from a lot of guilt the other day when I was beating my slave, but I found out it's totally fine because he survived a few days. Leviticus and Exodus have opened my eyes.

So you are going to hell?

@@antoniofirenze What? Do elaborate?

Agreed as like a -.5 degree progressive on this scale.

Personally I would put myself 2.5

​@@jleewaters same here.

it is the inconsistencies between faith, but yeah

Wow, you're trying to take like .001% of a group and say "they aren't all like that." What a completely useless way to look at the world. I'm sorry, if 12 people in a group of a million are anti-abortion, the group isn't anti-abortion and it's fair to say that the group is fine with abortion.

I think the problem is that all ideology is fundamentally anti Christian because they are not based on scripture and the presuppositions that they make in some cases reject the idea or neglect the existence of God such as liberalism, socialism and fascism all these ideologies reject God to varing extents and so are false at their foundation hence any ideals made through them although some may align with Christian ideals are false and corrupted.

Simply because humans tend to make everything way oversimplyfied in order to decide guickly. Thinking objectively is hard

​@one could say, it's kimpossible.....

@TheWandererOfDreams What’s the sitch?

I think that to make a video where he can explain this spectrum and make it digestible by a wide audience, one has to take some liberties in not being so wholly encompassing of all situations. Beyond that, I think what he was going for is that traits in each prior step are sort of prequisite to the next, as opposed to being solely exclusive to that point on the graph.

I am assuming if you get to the scripture denial part of the scale that he means you are someone who outright denies something specifically stated in the Bible, not interpreting it differently. That would be when it says do not commit adultery and a scripture denier would say that it’s fine.

I agree with your point but technically only 1 dimensional scale. A 2 dimensional scale might be a bit better

It’s a bit different though. No conservative Christian would deny the authority of scripture.

It’s a 7 minute video, it will indeed be reductive.

I don't think Jesus has a body count, so I'd assume the answer to "where would he stand" is "against the conquest and violence the church has caused since his passing"

Jesus used his position to argue for social justice but as far as I know he didnt deny scripture so he is a progressive 2

Jesus is God so he numbered the live of all living beings. So his body count is 1000 quadrillion

Jesus was very progressive at his time. It's undeniable that he was a social justice warrior himself. That's all I could say. Tbh, I wonder where'd he'd stand too. I feel like he'd hate what most conservative Christians nowadays are doing the same way he'd hate what most liberal Christians are doing. I feel like Jesus was he's own person, like, independent perhaps? He wouldn't necessarily subscribe to one belief or the other. He's like, a middle man.

Facts.

I think that it's a mistake to consider zeal as a substitute for faithfulness.

To be an extreme conservative Christian means who follow the Bible word for word. The conservative isn't sinning.

@@Uncle_Ruckus_ Not necessarily, Everyone thinks that they're interpretation is most in line with the will of God. And yet people disagree. Your following word for word might be someone else's cultural bias. I don't think that anyone is sinning merely by following their best understanding. But I do think that everyone is obligated to a certain amount of due diligence when it comes to being critical about their own beliefs and about being patient with those who disagree.

@@Grokford you know those red sentences? Those don't change no matter how many times it's been translated. The Bible changing it's meanings is a lie atheists and anti Christians say a lot. It's now being reinterpreted because we are living in the final days in revelation. Everywhere will be deception to lead you astray from God, even in the churches.

I mean, this is a 7 minutes video, of course it will be simplification.

For extra accuracy, add a perpendicular axis for heretical levels I guess

Why would Pentecostals be a non-Nicene group? I can't speak for all pentecostal churches, but most of us do belive in every point of in the Nicene creed

As an LDS person, I'm not quite sure what you mean when you mention us rejecting the Trinity. We believe in God, Jesus, and the Spirit as three separate beings. Is that uncommon in other faiths?

@@barnabasveliczky3647 Oneness Pentecostals, not Pentecostals in general. Oneness is a heresy that denies the Trinity

What does it mean to be from a LGBT household ? Are you adopted from a gay couple ? Or has your father later in life became gay or trans ? Or does your mother identify as your father and your father identity as your mother ?

@@matheuscaneta1194 most likely the parents dont discriminate on lgbtq and embrace/allow it in their household

Lmfao, so you come from a fundamentalist/religious household.

@@matheuscaneta1194 you can't just become gay or trans, stop that dumb logic already

we believe women should be in the hospitality/small group ministry, but not pastoral, simpply because of the nature of women (emotional). we are not narrow-minded like many would think, simply logical

@@thedomainofsealteamaqua Also it is HIGHLY SUSPECT🤨 (ulterior motive) that there is a NEW way for the church going forward (after THOUSANDS of frick@&en years) with Women in leadership.

​@@thedomainofsealteamaqua Eh. Anger is an emotion as well, and it's led to most wars we've had to this day.

@@Cindy99765 ok? I don’t see your point

@@thedomainofsealteamaqua Your argument is that women should not lead since they are emotional, but men can be very emotional as well.

I would adhere to roughly the same view. Faith in the person of Jesus is central, which is not very propositional. The bible clearly makes propositional truth claims. However, even though Scripture is infallible, we are fallible. The best we can do is be faithful to Jesus in the beliefs we hold. I attend a church that I disagree with on many propositions, but I genuinely believe the people are trying to be faithful to Christ and God's word. Who am I to demand they shift from their faithfully held beliefs?

God bless your heart. We need more like you

Well said!!! I am a Global Methodist with a strong respect for Orthodoxy (Wesleyan theology has some interesting crossovers with the East that are not normal for Western churches), and I fully expect to learn in the next life about areas where I'm wrong. I enjoy learning, so this isn't as much of a scary prospect for me as an interesting and exciting one. :-)

​@@nerysghemor5781Hey! I'm eastern orthodox and I was considering to read something from Wesley, but I can't find out what's his "magnum opus". Is there any book from him that you would recommend as an introduction to understanding his theology? (I want to read directly from him, not some biography)

@@jonaszswietomierz8017 I would have to look into that to find the titles. What I would suggest as a keyword is what Methodists refer to as entire sanctification. It’s nearly identical to theosis.

But why

Praying you see the truth Geo

@@JamalImran-mt2us because i seek knowledge

May the Lord bless you and may He open your eyes to the truth.

May the Lord bless you and may He open your eyes to the truth.

Which isn’t to say that social cohesion and order aren’t good things in and of themselves - they just aren’t Christian

agreed

I agree. I'm a lapsed Catholic (who wants to get back in the church and practice more) and I classify myself as progressive, although I respect the traditions and conventions of the church.

Respectfully, may I ask what the Gospel is? The definition seems to depend on the person using it. Just trying to understand the word/concept, and what is unrecognizable about it.

How do you see the Protestants as “more interested in social cohesion”? How do you get to those thoughts?

Same. I now know not to drink anything while I’m watching his videos, lol

Bot

Athiest is just not believing in any relegion

@@Im_a_sexafender exactly! we don't care what you believe, we just don't believe it ourselves.

yea the little side-comment about “if you’re a non-believer and have negative opinions about christianity, then you’re a normal non-believer” was really shady. persecution complex much? or maybe it’s projection

Yeah, Atheism isn't destroying the church. We're doing a fine job of that on our own. Truthfully, if we were doing the will of Jesus and following Him, not just using Him for a mascot, there would be fewer Atheists in general

@@johntaylor6851 i agree %100 percent, so many are turned away from religion by the people supposed to get them into it. i always hear "i went to Catholic school and now i'm not a Christian" and it breaks my heart. (not ragging on Catholics, that's jus the first example i remembered.)

I like your profile picture 💪🏻

Yeah it's great for a laugh

@@ViennaSteeler Turn to God ♥ do not learn on your own intuition

@@TheMasterPlayer-uo6ms "don't think for yourself" Lol alright buddy

​@@ViennaSteelerif you aren't a Christian then why even answer another Christians comment lol

Agreed...I'm a 0.5 progressive (not going any further left than that) and I actually look forward to finding out in the next life where I am wrong. I realize I don't know or understand everything and I think being open to learning and correction is good. From Scripture it seems that when a person was open to learning and correction when they didn't have it all right, Jesus was very kind in how he educated them, so I think that would be a positive conversation, not a negative one. (Think of the Samaritan woman, who had many things wrong theologically but showed openness to Him. Same with the eunuch who wanted to learn but didn't see the full meaning of the Scriptures on his own. That's how I hope the interaction will be when I get to Heaven. :-) )

Great comment ! God bless 🙏⭐️

​​@@nerysghemor5781 As a 0.5 - 1.5 conservative: Amen, I agree with you also. We all have fallible minds due to our sin nature so glory be to The Lord for being good to us. God Jesus bless you, fellow brother or sister in Christ! :)

At this point why not forgive everyone lol? If you believe in hell then it is certain that not everyone can be forgiven. And salvation is conditional on the basis of your faith, you must have a Christian faith. You cannot be both Christian and universalist. It matters where on the scale you are.

​@@nerysghemor5781Same

grew up at 3 conservative (young earth creationist, evolution-denier, etc.), now agnostic atheist. i don’t think i really entertained more progressive forms of christianity because, as i’m sure you know, conservative christianity teaches an “all or nothing” way of thinking about the world in general, but especially the faith and the bible. my journey out of christianity began with two simple questions: why do i believe the words in the bible? answer: well it’s the word of god. why do i believe it’s the word of god? because it says so..in the bible. when i realized that reasoning was patently circular, it made me a lot more skeptical of what i was being told.

​@@TaeyxBlack"You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make it drink"

Act faithfully with your clergy, while understanding that beliefs and other earthly machinations and categorizations of the intellect are only hindrances to be closer to God.

@@Mugiwara_Luffy_Samaif they dont have Jesus then yes they going to the hot place

@@Mugiwara_Luffy_Sama he is saying that like all humans if they reject Jesus then down they go

​@@Mugiwara_Luffy_SamaAll people are sinners and fall short of God's standard. I think what you're trying to ask is if being transgender is a sin which yes it is because it distorts the creation of God, a man can not become a woman and a woman can not become a man, God created you unique and special and it should be cherished over a feeling. A few scriptural references are Genesis 1:27, Genesis 5:2, and Matthew 19:4. Another thing I'd add is God can not make errors and believing in trans ideology spits in God's face by telling Him that He made you wrong and He has fault which is untrue, as if He did have fault He could not be God. A few scriptural references Deuteronomy 32:4, Psalm 18:30, Matthew 5:48, Romans 12:2.

I did not know that there Russian Baptists

@@kingxavior54 of course, there are even Russian Old Catholics, Russian Lutherans, Methodists, Mormons etc :)

That just comes down to following both of the great commandments.

Religion is dangerous!

The law can really be summed up in 2 words anyways so the theology or answer your looking for is already in scripture but getting a modern example isn’t a bad thing but tbh if Christian’s lived like Christ(most of us) the world would be far far better..

In what ways do you share ideals with universalists? And yes it does matter, salvation is conditional on your faith.

@@juansolo3227 look it up and you'll see descriptions of it, there are good examples. Also what? I'm a bit confused of what you're saying but it was a month ago so I'm not sure I have the right to answer anyway lol

@@LoveInUnreality that’s super fair. 😂I’m gonna be honest, I am coming back a month later to your response too and I don’t remember much either lol. I may have wanted to know whether or not you were a universalist yourself and where your beliefs aligned with the universalist I guess. You mentioned you had views that aligned with a universalist and a strict conservative and so I was most likely intrigued by that I guess. You also said it doesn’t matter what categories a person falls in, that probably ticked something off in my head at the time cause you brought that up in the same paragraph as universalism.

@@juansolo3227 ohh well I was also talking about my system as in, multiple people living in one head, some are conservatives some aren't at all. I think I worded it in a way it didn't make as much sense. Honestly I'm not very good at talking about stuff like this as I'm not super knowledgeable on the terms and don't really care tbh. I just try to fit into what I think best describes me moment by moment lol Thanks for replying anyway tho

@@LoveInUnreality fair enough, talking is hard. I get that, I’m dyslexic and also don’t sleep so I don’t sound the most eloquent when I speak to my friends at times. I do feel odded out by your phrasing and feel compelled to ask. I’m not quite sure what you mean by, “multiple people in one head.” What do you mean by that?

As a young earth creationist I think other denominations can be saved so they shouldn't switch

No way, denominational exclusion is far more extreme than youn-gearth Creationism. Very, VERY few Baptists will say that orthodox-practicing Methodists, Lutherans, and so on are damned. More will say that Catholics or even Orthodox are damned, but that's largely due to a lack of understanding of the Church's approach to things like papist Infusion versus Protestant Imputation, or the role of intercession of the saints. All of them will say that Progressive """""Christians""""" are damned because they loathe the Bible and its teachings, dismissing them as obsolete, bigoted, or even immoral. To say that your denomination is the only right one, or a set of only right ones, is a rejection of Jesus' teachings of one Holy, Universal, and Apostolic Church, as well as the Nicene Creed's declaration of the same. Ecumenicalism is the correct approach. Denominations exist because men disagree on open-handed doctrines like the nature of the Lord's Supper, Infusion versus Imputation, the organizational structure of the Holy Orders (Oversees, Deacons, and Elders), while agreeing on absolute Truths (e.g. Jesus is God, Jesus is the only way to Salvation, Jesus' Resurrection and Virgin Birth), and so on. I firmly believe that Catholics, Orthodox, and Protestant Christians that actually believe in the Word of God and practice its Truths accordingly are Christian and will see one-another in Heaven.

I'd say that >70% of exerising protestants are creationists.

@@Robin-sf3gk Creationism is the belief that the universe, and all in it, including life itself, is the handiwork of God and that He directed, orchestrated, and directly worked to make it at His pleasure and His discretion. That's it. If you believe the universe, let alone life, is an accident, you deny God the credit for the works of His Hands. That denial damns you, because it denies the WHO and the WHY. The HOW is open-handed (I believe evolutionary biology is God's means), but the WHO and WHY are non-negotiable.

@@Robin-sf3gkthat’s an extreme take

Same

I understand your point it lacks one thing. If you want believe in the Genuine Christ you are a Christian. That's why we have the Bible to learn about Him. I say this because I've known and met people that say they believe in Jesus Christ and are sincere when they say it but they believe in a different Jesus ie saying that He isn't God. He is God. People can be sincere and sincerely wrong at the same time. I'm glad you returned to Christianity please dig deep into God's word. Jesus is Truth. Eager for your progress in the gospel

@@Sirjwinsalot but how would someone have genuine belief in Jesus and then claim he's not God, it's very clear that the Bible says He is.

@@crazyand2099 Check out Arianism. It's essentially an old heresy that says Jesus is a created being, although the highest of the created order.

@@crazyand2099 ”Many will say to Me on that day, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in Your name, and in Your name cast out demons, and in Your name perform many miracles?’ And then I will declare to them, ‘I never knew you; depart from Me, you who practice lawlessness.’“ ‭‭Matthew‬ ‭7‬:‭22‬-‭23‬ ‭NASB1995‬‬

Probably all three

thats why i take even videos like this with a grain of salt. I dont fully recognize myself as a Christian so im no master of what goes on in christianity but its videos like this that do it for me. He clearly holds a lot of ill feelings towards more progressive churches despite trying to appear unbiased. Not saying he cant have those feelings but when your entire religion depends on loving your neighbor and then you have people like this everywhere that clearly dont love their neighbor, its hard to take seriously. Its why i left the church, no respect amongst any of them

@@Samookelybrother let me tell you. Jesus thought us to love everyone but he didn’t thought us to love sin. The people going towards the progressive side of Christianity are living in sin and encouraging sin. Like it is clearly stated that being homosexual is a sin. So for a church to tell it is Allright is just simply telling lies so we as Christian’s need to stop this and teaching people how God wants us to life. Idk the verse by head but you remember Jesus seeing people selling stuff in the synagogue and He goes in and makes everyone leave? He didn’t hate those people He just showed you that sin won’t be accepted. May God bless you my friend and turn you back to Him. If you have any questions to me feel free to ask me and I will gladly try to help you my friend

@@florianvriezen1656 i acknowledge that the bible calls it a sin, but having been raised in a very devout culture (whole family raised in dutch reformed) the only thing i didnt agree with was the treatment of these people that i saw around me. My gripe has always just been hypocrites, which i know are impossible to fully get rid of since we all have a tendency to be hypocritical ourselves. I just saw an extreme lack of accountability for other peoples mistreatment in cases where people were close to each other. Im a firm believer in keeping yourself and others around you accountable in a way that’s honest and not meant to harm, even if that means a good deal of self reflection. I agree that christian guilt is taking it too far though, getting stuck up on the past and doing too much self sacrifice isnt productive at all. (edit and i appreciate the offer thank you, I will consider)

@@florianvriezen1656 "The people going towards the progressive side of Christianity are living in sin and encouraging sin." Well they would often say the exact same thing as you, so would you agree that the actual difference is in what different Christians call sin? To my eyes, no one is endorsing sin, it's just that people have very different ideas of what is and isn't sin in the first place. " Like it is clearly stated that being homosexual is a sin." For example, this is a very clear statement, it is also a mistranslation. Homosexuality is a modern example, it does not appear in the original language of the Bible nor in any other ancient document. One could argue about what is or is not included in the meaning of the original text, but to give the impression of exactness in translation where the source text has a different connotation is an inaccurate or misleading translation. How misleading is another question. "So for a church to tell it is Allright is just simply telling lies" I would say that this statement lacks empathy. It's not a lie, people genuinely believe that homosexuality is not a sin. I don't know exactly how we could guarantee a healthy dialogie with other people, but I have to imagine that assuming that they are lying about their own beliefs is not a good start. "so we as Christian’s need to stop this and teaching people how God wants us to life." They would say the same about you.

​@@florianvriezen1656 Not loving sin doesn't mean being smug, snide and uncharitable to your opponents who engage in such. Which is what this whole video is about.

That’s just because the degrees are more broad in scope and separated, whereas progressivism is just one slippery slope into damnation. He _can’t_ get more specific for the degrees or he’d risk losing truthful accuracy, whereas progressivism is always the same and so can be specified.

@@disguisedcentennial835 Seems like you missed the entire point of the video.

@@AatamiFin I have no clue what you think the point of this video was lol

@@disguisedcentennial835 There are actually some of us who fall slightly on the progressive side who...well, didn't progress. By this scale I would fall at 0.5 and I actually do have clear lines not just on the right, but also on the left that I won't cross.

@@disguisedcentennial835Someone has a clear bias

That's because you actually became a Christian and wanted to obey God.

me too actually

Same here. I think many younger Christians start off this way due to how politics have become so religious. The left is very good at proselytizing by manipulating human empathy.

Welcome to the club. We love Jesus too. It’s great. He tells you to do stuff and you do it.

@@redeemedzoomer6053hey man, great videos. Fellow Zoomer here. If you have trouble reading the word of God, check out podcasts. The one I use is called the Bible in a year. (Yes I know you’re a Presbyterian and you’re Catholic, I think you and I are in the same boat). It’s an extremely easy way to swallow the entire (Catholic) Bible in one year. If you drive for more than 2.5 hours/week, you can probably listen to the entire Bible in 1 year. I’m on my 4th lap now. Great stuff man. Keep it up.

He thinks people on the right want Christianity to be exclusive. That’s absurd. I mean I don’t talk to people on the right more than my leftist friends. But I’m on the right and I know what Christianity is and what’s it’s not and it’s not exclusive.

JWs are like this in some ways

Google a young earth channel, but I would assume that in their view the dinosaurs are the dragons depicted in every culture

No, i think its because, let's say, im at one for progressive, and yet i believe in some stuff in 1 conservative, it will still make me 1 progressive because of the fact that conservative requires that i dont belive in progressive stuff

To believe that the Bible is infallible and is truly the word of God directly leads to the conclusion that there should be no female pastors.

Genesis 1:27 "Male and female, He created them." He didnt create 'non-binary' people.. we did.

priest. obviously. that's a really dumb comment, in almost every language you default to the masculine if you don't know the specific gendered word or if you don't know the subjects gender. you're so caught up in your own fairy tales of "owning" liberals that you forgot to consider that almost no one cares

🅱️riests

I mean.... You could just ask them but I'm sure that is difficult for you.😂

@@mustachemac5229Not difficult, impossible. That’s because there is no such thing as a non-binary priest.

Respect my fellow sigma

@@vicsterrling1294 haha thank you for your respect but I am an alpha male so it’s better to call me alpha than sigma

Far right, as in ultra capitalism reactionary? May God change your heart, both capitalism and socialism are inherently sinful economics

@@maxzation I’m not capitalist, I’m authoritarian far right, capitalism is libertarian. I don’t wanna express my economic views but I’m definitely not socialist nor capitalist

​@@theheroboy1i think you are socialist, that starts with "national" 😏

True, he himself said it wasn't about politics

What is also interesting is that these two extremes also appear in the two main groups Jesus had theological debates with during his ministry: the Sadduces were theologically liberal in that they ignored all scripture besides the Thora and even denied the afterlife. The Pharisees on the other hand were the self-righteous legalists. There is this awesome episode recounted in Mark 12, Matthew 22 and Luke 20 were our Lord refutes both of the factions nonsense back to back.

@@duplodragon That is a good point.

Very well said

Anywhere near that is out of bounds. Either you believe the core tenants of Christianity and take it seriously or don’t believe it at all. Granted some take the expression of that way too strictly to where it’s legalism and not actually Christianity (far conservative side), but if you don’t believe Jesus is the Son of God who died and rose again for humanity, that you can know him personally, and that he is the only way to God, then you’re not a Christian. It’s either that or nothing.

You can’t be a universalist and a Christian

Actually all liberal and conservative Christians 100 years ago would have been "ethnonationalist".

Glad you have been saved

I think that evolution as a concept is real but not radical evolution like we used to be apes. I dont even believe darwin believed that at the end of his life.

@@HaydenFPlaysVODS We are still apes and Darwin never denounced evolution and was active in his congregation throughout his life.

@@HaydenFPlaysVODS evolution doesn't claim we used to be apes, please do more research

i'm exactly the same. ex-atheist too, thank God

Depends entirely on how microscopic you want to get with your analysis

He's saying the original texts, which while the original literal pages they were written on have decayed away, comparison of the many translations can be used to discover what the original text said, such as was done at the Council of Nicaea. To demonstrate as an example: If someone wrote a sentence about dogs at the park, and then after many people had copied it, with changes being introduced, if you looked at all of those imperfect copies, you could figure out what the original text of the sentence was. Take the following examples: "I went to the park and saw 8 dogs playing in a pond." "I went to the beach and saw 12 dogs playing in the water." "We went to the park and saw 12 dogs playing in a pond" "I went to the park and saw 12 dogs playing with a ball." "I went to the park and saw 12 cats playing near a pond." What's the original sentence? "I went to the park and saw 12 dogs playing in a pond"

He probably meant any manuscript that isn’t a Bible. But only a fragment of a book or a book of the Bible. Because yes there is no original manuscript. Which is how God protected his words, because if there was a preserved original text we could modify this and corrupt his words. But without an original, only thousand of copies across the word, you can compare them with their variations and find out what was the original.

Its more complicated. It was common back in the day before people actually knew the science between evolution and geology, but since than no official Catholic statements said that only young Earch creation is acceptable, some stating explicitly that evolution is acceptable. Idk about Orthodox situation since Orthodox Church is way more decentralized so I believe there is no "official" stance on that matter.

YEC has been the position of the Church since its inception, only changing around the time of the enlightenment. People like augustine denied the literal view of genesis 1, but because he believed the universe was younger, not older

YEC was the universal view of the church until Charles Lyell and Higher Criticism in mid late 19th century

I am a Catholic and I have settled on intelligent design. Most people in the intelligent design world are either old earth creationists or theological evolutionists, which honestly overlap greatly. This is basically me after reading incessantly on the issue.

*The Pope would be extremely disappointed.*

​@@MatthewPatel-hx4ci Nah the current pope is fine with it

You also might believe in inerrancy and be opposed to women’s ordination, but not necessarily think denominations that have wrongly allowed it are automatically “false churches”, just churches committing an error.

It's ironic how quickly they seek to regress our society by throwing the proverbial baby out with the bath water rather than taking the time to analyze what's actually broken and leave what isn't alone.

That means you like classical music right?

@@AlekseyMaksimovichPeshkov Yeah sure, why?

@@CatholicSoldierX Oh because I assumed you may one of those people who want to be proud of their race and heritage (white people I mean) but they still enjoy non-white music like hip-hop (don't consider it music) and can't stand actual European music

@@AlekseyMaksimovichPeshkov I never met someone like that, that sounds more like a racist liberal to be honest. Most of hip-hop is indeed very tasteless.

@@CatholicSoldierX My uncle claimed he confronted and beat up a bunch of so called white supremacists who were listening to rap music. He said according to them their justification for that was because they thought black people were meant to entertain white people. That does kind of sound like the white Southern slave owners actually

They like the lore but dont believe in it.

​@@someguy7819like me

True. I believe some things on the farther right side but don't believe some of the things that come before it. (Ie I'm not a YEC or believe other denominations are going to hell, but I do believe some stuff about etho-nationalism.)

I'd say the conservative degreese are very much influenced by his mainline perspective. While evangelicals/baptists and charismatics which make the majority in western countries if you just focus on regulary exercising christians mix these things up. For example I'd claim that far over 70% of western regulary exercising christians are creationists or would say that the vatican is not from god (degree 4) while a minority realy would have a problem with a preaching woman.

The debate one

It is interesting, and it really is difficult huh, cause every denomination, whilst they agree* with the Nicene Creed, have their own varying interpretations of Christ, big or small. For example, Catholics belief that Jesus literally turned his body and blood into bread and wine (that process is called transubstantiation), and Protestants belief it’s a metaphor. Depending on which interpretation you accept, Jesus will be thought of by each side as more Liberal or Conservative.

​@@traumatizedcritic8679 Odds are he'll agree with George Washington and tell us to not have political parties.

Not Christians

Aren't they heritics in the literal sense?

Indeed, we Jehovah's Witnesses are far more dedicated to a strict, literal understanding of the Bible than the Catholic church or most protestants, and according to at least one survey are THE MOST anti abortion denomination, however, we do not accept the Trinity, because its not in the Bible but rather a later accretion, and are Annihilationist, since that seems to be what the Bible teaches, Ecclesiastes 9:4-6, Psalm 6:5 and so on. However, if you start from the point of believing the Bible DOES teach the Trinity, you need to really doubt the Bible to doubt the Trinity. The Unitarians had that problem, though there are still Bible believing Unitarians, just not in the UU.

Those people worship something other than the Christian God.

​​@@clpfox470I think that mormons are in a gray area since they truly believe that God came to America or smthing and yada yada

Some of there doctrines lead to apostasy, especially Universalism, Unitarianism, and biblical errency

That's homophobic

​@@peopleskingdomofwolcottiagood

The "Affirmation Gospel" is replacing the "Prosperity Gospel" but don't worry, it won't be here forever

​@peopleskingdomofwolcottia Whoops! Oh well. Looks like I made some Sinners angry! What will I ever do!?