Isn't the Ecumenical Council of Jerusalem in Acts 15 the first Council? I mean it was a group of people deciding on beliefs so technically it meets the requirements, right?

Remember if you're good boy or girl santa will punch a heretic for you this year

5:45 you were one block away from digging yourself down to death bud.

“God of God Light of Light Lo, He abhors not the virgin’s womb Very God, begotten not created.” Merry Christmas!

I just realized these aren’t voiceovers and you’re playing as you talk. You’re really good at multitasking lol

Nestorians: 2 vials: one water and one oil, packaged together. Miaphysites: water and oil in the same container, but constantly shaken up to keep it homogeneous. Chalcedonians: water and oil in the same container. Separate, but one.

Im from Belarus and Im SO GLAD that i kearn english so I can watch your videos.

16:28 Correction: Calvin, so far as I can tell, never directly affirms the perpetual virginity of Mary. He refutes what he considers bad arguments against it (specifically Helvidius' argument that the "till" implicitly suggested future conjugal relations between Mary and Joseph in Matthew 1:25), but he also refutes what he considers bad arguments in favor of it. Specifically, in referencing the Latin church's treatment of Luke 1:34, he writes: *"The conjecture which some have drawn from these words, that she had formed a vow of perpetual virginity, is unfounded and altogether absurd. She would, in that case, have committed treachery by allowing herself to be united to a husband, and would have poured contempt on the holy covenant of marriage; which could not have been done without mockery of God. Although the Papists have exercised barbarous tyranny on this subject, yet they have never proceeded so far as to allow the wife to form a vow of continence at her own pleasure. Besides, it is an idle and unfounded supposition that a monastic life existed among the Jews."* My suspicion is that Calvin did disaffirm perpetual virginity at least privately, but understood that the weight of the Church Fathers and contemporary society disagreed with him on that point, and he didn't consider it a critical element of faith regardless. If he foresaw the level of devotion Mary would accrue in the current day, I think he would have opposed the doctrine more directly.

Inaccurate view of councils. Councils aren’t right or wrong dependent on whether they contradict Scripture or not. The whole reason councils are convened is because there is a disagreement on what the Scripture says! The Arians had their verses to support their heresies too but Nicaea overruled their interpretation of Scripture. By your logic, the Arians are justified to not follow Nicaea because to them it contradicts Scripture. If there is no other infallible authority to settle the issue then the Arians are justified in following their interpretation of the Bible.

something that orthodox have brought up which makes me curious, is if the ecumenical councils are not infallible, but the bible is, isn't this a contradiction as the early church is the ones who put the bible together in the first place? How can they be fallible but also put together an infallible book? It's something where I find it hard to side with protestantism on, as much as I have some concerns about orthodoxy and catholicism.

Gotta love the constant digs at Orthodoxy. Oh well, one day he shall find it.

Hieria had about 20 more bishops But none of the major patriarchates Like Rome Antioch and Jerusalem

I like how on Christmas eve you bring up st. Nick haha

Can you talk more about the other councils, like ones that are specific to Catholic/EO, ones that have been over-turned, etc.? This was really interesting and I'd love to hear more, even if it's about ones that Protestants don't affirm!

Thanks again zoomer, the purposes behind why these counsels were formed are very important contexts.

Hey this was the question I submitted! Thanks for giving me such good answers to some of questions! Merry Christmas

Merry Christmas my calvinist brother in Christ, child was given to us

Bro mining straight down ☠

The whole point of a Church council is to clear disagreements on scripture. Which means that you have to have a source outside scripture. Council’s by their nature are not Protestant. It relies on sacred tradition and a Magisterium

Thankyou for visiting Nikopol. Next time, take a look at our railroad, we have plenty of settlements along it, and go to to the old town to find the first church

I think that, with ecumenical councils, there's so much going on besides pure theology...it seems that oftentimes theological differences line up with cultural or economic differences as well. A few examples off the top of my head (I could be incorrect): The first divisions in the book of acts being Jewish vs Greek Christians Arians being upper-class and barbarian tribes while the orthodox being more common folk. Monophysites being non-Greco Romans Within the English reformation the more pro-Catholics being more upper class and the pro-protestants being lower class (I might have this reversed) Donatists being native north Africans and Catholics being more affiliated with Rome Latin/Roman west vs Greek/Greek culture east Protestant countries being northern European and using Germanic languages and Catholic countries being southern European and using Romance languages. In the US, liberal Christians being in the big cities and the coasts and conservative Christians being in smaller towns and the center/south of the country. I think that we also see this happening in divisions within other religions. The original division between Sunni and Shia correlated with class (and who had joined up first), and today it largely fits with Arab vs Persian cultures. In Buddhism you have Mahayana in east Asia and Theravada in southeast Asia. My pet theory is that the theology part is mostly for the nerds having the debates and the common folk just side with whichever nerd comes from their culture. Also, in regards to Mary, whatever turns out to be true I will always find it weird that people put so much thought and emotions into the sex life of a lady from 2000 years ago...like that's personal!

RZ, do you accept any of the cannons of Nicaea? While you accept the Creed, it doesn’t seem that you can affirm any of the rulings about bishops and proto-Metropolitans.

It’s always a good day when you upload👍🏻

Iconoclasm was done in direct imitation of the Muslims because the Byzantine Empire lost some battles to them.

What is your opinion about the shroud of turin?

Merry Christmas, Zoomer. 🎄❄🔔🎅🎁

When are we got a video on canonicity and the apocrypha?

Love your videos man. The necessity of a mechanism to decide between contradictory interpretation of scripture is what led me to be Catholic. Practically speaking its impossible to fulfill Ephesians 4:4-6 with out a teaching authority to solve disputes over biblical interpretation. It's the inability of the East to hold further councils that makes them so unappealing in my eyes.

so ministerial authority determines the only source of magesterial authority? yep makes perfect sense

I love this channel, I watch it everyday but this video explains why I think Protestants are LARPers

Thanks for the video. I'm looking into the Eastern Orthodox church, coming from baptist church. I'm going to have to do some research on the 7th eccumenical council. Merry Christmas!

The Catholic ones. Thank you for participating.

It’s always pretty cool (for Catholics anyway) to note that Pope Saint Leo nullified canons at the Council of Chalcedon, and this decision was accepted by the bishops at the time. Papal authority go brrr

This video is so good. Thanks Zoomer.

Ecumenical Council: "This scripture means (insert meaning)" Protestant: "actually its wrong and isnt authoritative because it contradicts scripture." Ecumenical council: "oh really? What makes you think that?" Protestant: "Because i believe it contradicts scripture."

How does it work in Protestantism to interpret the scriptures without the Sacred Tradition handed down by the apostles and their disciples? There does not seem to be an ultimate authority in Protestantism that guides and binds all believers into one truth. One can leave a church and start a new one and can be just as much a Protestant as the other guy.

17:14 i disagree, Jesus give Authority to apostoles,not their books , of corse bible have Authority, but not Highest

Very cool!

Merry Christmas Eve!

You should continued this romp through the councils. I think it would be interesting to see the reformed view of councils of the Catholic Church after 2nd Nicea.

That would be an ecumenical matter. Yes!

I have a question. I dont fully agree with any church, and our church is not a real one they are mostly hipocrates and me and my friends believe tho, so can we be considered a church, the 4 of us?

The Council of Florence may reaffirm the Filioque but the Council of Toledo established it.

Merry Christmas Brothas and Sistas

Which bible has an infallible authority, if different churches have different biblical cannons?

to that comment at the end, I'm sure you'll give a more clear explanation but is sounds like you're saying you like sola scriptura because under it you can pick and choose what doctrines you hold to based on your own interpretation of the scripture

Merry Christmas to you all! God loves you!

Merry Christmas Guys🎉

no no not "dont make images of God" "Thou shalt not make any GRAVEN images of anything of Heaven above or the earth beneath." dont be like that

all the ones recognized by the universal church

How can the assyrian church of the east think ecumenical councils are infallible, if they are Nestorian?

Two important things emerged from the Council of Nicea. The Nicene Creed and Apollo Creed (aka St Nick) 😂

Hey RZ, how do we know what books of the bible are canon since many denominations have different canon? If you can do that sometime I'd love to see it.

Disclaimer: I am not formally educated in theology in any way, merely brought up in the Presbyterian church as the son of an elder. I find the perpetual virginity of Mary to be intuitively unlikely. From Matthew 1:24-25 [1] we are told Joseph and Mary did not consummate their marriage until Mary had given birth to Jesus. Now I don't know what the original Greek would actually mean with what is translated as "until", but the very fact that this is mentioned, and the fact that consummation is not just normal but an integral part of marriage, should mean we can expect that they did in fact consummate unless explicitly told otherwise. Then in Matthew 12:46-50 [2], Jesus' mother and brothers came to see Him during His ministry. Some say these were sons of Joseph but not of Mary (sons from a previous marriage of Joseph), but I don't think that really makes much sense either - if that were the case, where is that wife of Joseph anywhere else in the Bible, and why are her sons hanging out with Mary? Another suggestion is that it was Mary of Clopas and her sons, but that would be his aunt and cousins, not mother and brothers. If that were so, would they not be referred to merely as relatives? And then there is James, called the brother of Jesus. It has also been said that this James was the son of Mary of Clopas, which would make him a cousin - in which case the term "brother" is deceptive - or that he was a son of Joseph but not of Mary - a son from a previous marriage. Now that's less unreasonable, but I think it unlikely that Joseph had a previous marriage, and here's why - when Jesus was presented to the temple, he was not redeemed as the firstborn. Now, whether Joseph had a previous marriage or not, this is fine, because the law was that the firstborn of every womb must be redeemed (Exodus 13:1-2 [3]). But the reason He was not redeemed and was instead presented for lifelong service to God, was because Joseph and Mary could not afford to redeem Him. They also could not afford the standard offering of cleansing as prescribed in Leviticus 12 [4], instead bringing two doves or pigeons (Luke 2:22-24 [5]) - the provision in the law for the poor. Since Joseph and Mary were so poor, is it reasonable for Joseph to have another wife and other children that he needed to feed while he was betrothed to Mary? While it's not completely out of the question, I would call it financially irresponsible, to such a degree that I would argue it goes against the verse that says "Joseph was a righteous man" (Matthew 1:19 [6]). Joseph was willing to risk his own reputation to save Mary's life. We don't know anything about their betrothal or when it they intended to be married (bearing in mind that betrothal was as legally binding as marriage itself, but not completed or consummated), whether perhaps the marriage was brought forward as a result of Mary's pregnancy, but I think it possible that Joseph was working to build more financially stability to bring his wife home to, but God's timing trumped his. So in conclusion: I cannot prove against the perpetual virginity of Mary (not that I expect I could, hundreds of years after the council in question), but I find it quite unlikely. [1] www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew%201%3A24-25&version=NIV [2] www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew+12%3A46-50&version=NIV [3] www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Exodus+13%3A1-2&version=NIV [4] www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Leviticus%2012&version=NIV [5] www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Luke+2%3A22-24&version=NIV [6] www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew+1%3A19&version=NIV - current NIV reads "Joseph was faithful to the law and yet did not want to expose her to public disgrace", but previous NIV publishings and current NIV footnote reads "was a righteous man and did not want...". CSB, ESV, NASB and NKJV read similarly, using the conjunction "and" rather than "but" or "yet".

Music at 4:37 ?

Please, talk about your thoughts on the after life!!!!

ho ho ho merry christmas

What are your thoughts on theistic evolution

Interesting, but confusing towards the end.

so much respect for you as a Catholic

5:44 I'm a Catholic and my brother is baptist. Even he likes to joke about "Santa Claus punching a heretic in the face" from time to time. And then, I jokingly call him s heretic. Much fun is have by all involved.

“The entire church cannot be fundamentally wrong” uhhh. Yeah. Yeah it can

Merry Christmas! 🎄

As a Protestant I would be very interested in a video on the arguments made from the bible in favor of Mary's perpetual virginity, and why early Protestants adhered to this doctrine.

We use icons of Christ because the Nativity has made manifest the Invisible God

Ey RZ, I would like to suggest to you a video idea. Something like matching percentages in dating apps but actually christian denominations, how does it seem?

the 7th ecumenical council never said any of the things you said. you are twisting the words of it to fit your description

All Ecumenical Councils have authority because they are all from the one holy Catholic and apostolic church ☦️

Some greek orthodox churches also have images of the Father

19:40 it's good that you say that about Modern American Individualism because I would say that about all the American Continent.

You know I had never actually understood at all what “Icon Veneration” was until now. Can anyone explain how bowing to an “Icon” is not the most obvious straight up violation of the second commandment possible?

Would you take a picture of/with Christ if He was walking here among us today?

Comments are gonna be poppin' on this one *Munches popcorn*

"The entire Church can't be wrong over a long period of time" my brother in Christ, Protestantism didn't exist for an entire millenium at least 😅😂

Doesnt the Bible specify that Joseph doesnt lay with Mary for as long as shes pregnant with Christ, which would imply that he hit it afterwards, even if the bible doesnt necessarily speak on that in particular?

Catholics stay with you! 😌

Amen❤❤🎉🎉🎉😊😊

Hey, im thinking of becoming Catholic and i was wondering if you knew any good resources for me to learn more about it?

to the perpetual virginity dogma, discussed somewhere around minute 16:35 , isn't there very clear, even biblical evidence that jesus had siblings? I mean how could that be if mary stayed a virgin?

With the 5th Council, Doesn’t the Bible say that Jesus Had Brothers. James starts his epistle by affirming he is the brother of Jesus and the Gospels tell the story of Mary and Jesus’s brothers coming to visit him, Mark 3:31-35. Isn’t that proof Mary did not stay a virgin and conceived other children?

What gave you authority to deny ecumenical councils?

More of a Trent guy myself!

24:28 - Jesus answered: “Don’t you know me, Philip, even after I have been among you such a long time? Anyone who has seen me has seen the Father. How can you say, ‘Show us the Father’? Do you not believe that I am in the Father and the Father is in Me? The words I say to you, I do not speak on My own. Instead, it is the Father dwelling in Me, performing His works. 11Believe Me that I am in the Father and the Father is in Me- or at least believe on account of the works themselves. (John 14:9-11)

13:35 lutheran reconquista!

Great video.. didnt really care for the minecraft aspect of it but still

I listen to sleep

In Mathew doesn't it say he had brothers and sisters how could Mary be a virgin her whole life than?

Re: the Perpetual Virginity of Mary and why I disagree with it. Mary was married to Joseph for at least 12 years. They were well enough in that time to travel to Egypt and back. They also traveled to Jerusalem with Jesus. St Paul said that it was wrong for married couples to abstain from sexual intimacy unless there was illness or for an agreed. Therefore Mary and Joseph would have been disobeying God if they had abstained for their entire married.

Where in the Bible does the blood of Jesus get called “the blood of God”? (genuine question)

Catholics do not think ecumenical councils are infallible. Such an idea has actually long been a source of debate within the church and caused many popes to refrain from calling them

In regards to the 5th council and the perpetual virginity of Mary, does that mean that she never stopped being a virgin due to the birth, or that her and Joseph never had sex after Jesus birth?

God bless

16:26 Wait a minute how the heck did Jesus have brothers then (such as James) when in the Bible it mentions Jesus having siblings?

All of them

About Mary being perpetually virgin, wouldn't that be ruled out by the fact that the bible shows pretty clearly that Jesus had brothers and sisters? If was a reason that people from his home town did not believe he was anything special. Matthew 13:54-48 And I'm pretty sure there are a lot more verses that show he had brothers and sisters in the flesh, unless they were all adopted, which I know of no proof of that being the case.

Arius was a presbyter (think normal priest)

My brain breaks when I hear that Bible > church when the church came first and was written by those who built the church on behalf of Jesus who created it!!!! The church came FIRST and is what the Bible is rooted in not the other way around!!!

New Drop

Nestorius also omitted "begotten, not made, consubstantial with the Father" when citing the Nicene Creed to Cyril. He *did not believe Jesus was homoousios* (of same substance) but rather that he was homoiousios (of like substance) which makes Jesus different from God. This is not compatible with Nicene Christianity.

I know and can perceive the truth of Christianity within my heart and spirit but my mind cannot make heads or tails of how it would be possible This duality gives me great stress in my daily life unfortunately