Відео

Thank you for your channel. I haven’t had much opportunity to dive into the longer form videos but I’ve been studying the Orthodox Church here recently due to interest and understanding what the first century church was. I’m from a church of Christ viewpoint so we tend to emulate that first century church viewpoint. But as I’ve studied I’ve been intrigued but also confused when I encounter something (iconography, veneration of saints and Mary, the tradition of the Orthodox Church) that challenges my beliefs. I hope to come to fuller understanding. But your videos are very helpful so thank you. May God continue to bless you in your work for His kingdom.

Protestant: Love God but keep your distance... Orthodox: Draw close to God, He loves You!

If you start with the presupposition (albeit true) Jesus founded one Church, who historically through the *permanent gift of the Holy Spirit* compiled their inerrant Bible in 382AD at Council of Rome, then it logically follows I can trust and believe in that Church when defining dogmas (perpetual truths) unless I reject Jesus promises. It’s that simple. Either the Holy Spirit is with them “ALL days” as our Lord promised or it “disappeared” “temporarily abandoned” us for another church, which is the insane nonsensical logical conclusion of protestantism.

The ultimate question that can settle where to go to church can be where did the Holy Spirit lead you? If the power of the Holy Spirit guides someone into a church and God hath set some down in the church (as it says in I Corinthians) then God's guidance is the source of the individual being in the church. This will also never be a satisfying answer to those who want debate, or theology, or philosophy. God's spirit guiding you, is not their philosophical or theological answer as it based on a personal experience, and not an answer that is apparent to everyone. This is because the reason is an experience and not an argument. It was a move of God and not a decision of a human mind that led someone to the church. It's a testimony and not an answer to an argument. Perhaps the better answer is, are we willing to let go of needing an answer that can be explained or believed by everyone, and instead accept the work of God to place us where God would have us, so that the Holy Spirit is the reason we are in the church we are in, regardless of how others will feel about it?

I actually think that what church you join isn't as important as it can seem. I'm not convinced that Catholicism or Eastern Orthodoxy are true, so I'm convinced of the catholicity of basically all biblically-faithful churches. If this is right, then it doesn't matter too much which church you pick, even if it ends up RCC or EO. What matters is that you are actively part of the body of Christ, in fellowship, engaged in working for the Kingdom of God. I do grant that, if RC or EO are correct--as well as a few other denominations, then I'm wrong and it is--indeed--important which church you pick.

You seem like a very nice young man. I am somehwat new to this dicussion so I will just state the obvious: You do know that many more people convert from Roman Catholic to Protestant then the other way around, right?

Either you allow God to reveal himself to you in a historical, logically consistent, harmonious way or you place self invented obstacles, seek confirmation bias and justify your sins in order to not bend the knee to his One Holy Catholic Apostolic Church and instead follow your own opinions and standards.

True Faith Isn't comfortable... None of the Martyrs believed that.... Too many " christians" believe that God loves them so they don't have to go through Any hard times or trials... St Paul said different IN THE Bible! Jesus said if the world hates Me, it Will Hate You Because Of Me Evangelicals think they're on the road to the Emerald City..... Where All manner of perks and benefits are exclusive to them.... God is Not a country club.

Love the new space! Congrats!

He's just stirring the pot here. Study and Edification are one thing, But stirring the pot just for argument's sake.. Austin is trying to reach a conclusion which is not easily reached. Protestants believe they're right As do Catholics and Orthodox. Non Denominationals believe Their way of worship is the Only way. You have the " sola scriptura" sect which is " Bible alone" and yet they cherry pick which parts to adhere to... ( No graven images and yet they completely disregard the laws against eating certain kinds of animals) Leviticus states no cutting of beard, hair...no tattoos or markings but They believe it's Ok... because " reasons" Why would you adhere to 1 particular part of the Law and not the Entire body of it?? He's just stirring the pot....which results in More divisions not unity. If Austin believes His faith path is correct than he should state as much. Catholics and Protestants believe you can have " intellectual faith ' Orthodox do not. God cannot be grasped by the mind/ intellect alone Also Protestants put God in a box... God needs Their permission to save you. . Evangelicals tend to " sell" God and faith....as though it were real estate! Watch Joel Osteen some time. .

Comfort/convenience was a big hurdle for me as a baptist pastor. Surely God wouldn’t want me to leave the pastoral job I got with a seminary degree? But I had to humble myself to a secular job in order to do it. It was worth it though and I’d do it again, as hard as it was at least now I’m consistent in my beliefs and practices.

because they are different people. if you study true history and the bible you will be non denominational.

Processing the faith through the mind and making it an intellectual exercise…. And Pride

Easy. My wife won't hear it. Zero interest. So I'm stuck in low church protesantism. It's not all bad, the pastor is very good. There's just absolutely zero liturgy, zero iconography, baptism is only a symbol, communion (Eucharist) is only a symbol, modern christian radio hit worship songs. Meh. I go to Divine Liturgy by myself whenever the opportunity presents itself.

No, I cannot name who is on those icons.

Another possible starting point is to ask how many churches did our Lord establish? How many brides could He reasonably have? Is He like Solomon with hundreds or is even 2 brides one too many? If there is One way, truth, life, Lord and baptism how can there be more than one Church? If we accept more than one Church, we've accepted more than One way and truth and that simply isnt possible. If you can accept the necessity of one church the question then becomes which one is it? Some say the papacy is the litmus test, maybe so, but I'd take a deep look into contraception and see where that points. God bless all who are discerning His will 🙏

Or, through humility one submits to Christ and His Church. There are only two options: Roman Catholic or Orthodox. Protestantism is not a Church, but a set of ideas.

In my heavy delving into the early church fathers, writ large, and working my way up slowly towards and theough the historical epochs, i.e. Alexandrian vs Antichochan controversies, first iconoclasm, east-west split of 1054, etc, via a historical approach, and then comparing what is presented today as "the true church", whether it be Roman, Eastern, Pre-Nicene, or some Protestant flavor, they are ALL inevitably found wanting and are all subject to doctrinal novelty. So, if the epistemological and historical belief in the Christian God is the foundation on which all other things must be built, Scripture is the most original and oldest source. Scripture, even decentralized and fragmented as it was in Paul and Peter's lifetimes, predates dogma and the church. Therefore, an interpretation of Scripture that adheres to an institutional Church as a completely valid authority, it is always nonetheless premised only upon Scripture's dictates. This, even as I continue to pour into every church father I can find and who has been translated, inevitably leads, even by kicking and screaming, toward the Reformation and the original Reformers reclamation of the Gospel truth from Pharasaical traditions. Granted, the Protestants of today have also veered way off path, but this is indicative of human and church history, and it appears it will always be in play by sin and by the great manipulator and deceiver, the devil. The first Reformers were as close as possible to reclaiming what the earliest church communities believed and practiced, prior to the inevitability of institutional accretions, and while every Christian expression today seems to have missed the mark somewhat, Lutherans and Anglicans were the closest, despite their histories. More or less, there isn't one historical Christian expression that isn't guilty of error, not one, so the best we, as current day penitants, can achieve in preserving the Gospel, the greatest news in all of existence, is to cling to those who would preserve it best. And even that is subject to great scrutiny. All authorities must be subject to THE authority, God's Word, or it's simply another attempt by man to mimic God.

Great video, Austin! For those who lean towards theological relativism, do you think there is a relationship between theological relativism and at least some degree of deism? If we believe it doesn’t really matter to Jesus where we go to church, doesn’t that mean we believe He just hasn’t bothered to reveal all that much about Himself? What would be the point of further theological study if God didn’t care about those particulars? More importantly, how could relationship with Him thrive in a context where all we can know about Him are the lowest common theological denominators? It kind of looks to me like relativism and deism go hand in hand, at least to some degree.

You’re awesome, Austin! I am a cradle Catholic, but still very much consider my Christian pilgrimage to be a lifelong work of conversion. I think the point that having to intellectually ascent to every claim of a faith tradition before converting is far too high a bar.

Hmm. Why the _bodily Assumption,_ instead of, say, the _Immaculate Conception?_ When I became Catholic my concerns were the other way around. I thought it was perfectly obvious that the _disciplina arcana_ would be applied to the locations of Mary, Lazarus, any remaining apostles especially Peter, every bit as much as to the Eucharist. And once persecution ceased to be an issue, it was also perfectly clear that the relics of Mary could not be found anywhere, whereas the relics of so many other New Testament figures were in known places with churches/shrines on them. And, there was an existing tradition related to Constantine's mother about why this was. And it seemed reasonable that something that already happened to Enoch and Elijah (and maybe Moses) might have happened to Mary. So if I'd remained Protestant, I'd have probably held Mary's bodily assumption as a private opinion.

Jesus is God ✝️✝️✝️

This is why the Orthodox church has a long Catechism (about a year). You have to experience life and worship in the church and be able to talk to the priest about all the questions and concerns that arise during Catechism. There are just some things we have to experience to know if we are Truly in Christ's church. We can only do intellectual surveys so long before it begins to lead people away from salvation by giving them an excuse not to follow the Truth. ua-cam.com/video/U7JfrKih9d4/v-deo.htmlsi=u9xuWw-el0CS84Jo

So to sum up the Catholic position, everyone is saved, unless you deliberately choose to reject God? That makes sense to me

Thank you for this

why delay? because they fear rejection, or have a need to please men, rather than God. "The truth shall set you free."

I found this video very interesting! As a convinced evangelical, I really can’t see the problems people have with sola scriptura or why anyone would go Roman Catholic. You opened my eyes a bit to the ways people approach the evidence, which at least made me understand more why people might convert. 🙂

As a former evangelical (now atheist), the phenomenon of (de)conversion appears to me to be based on what one values. I came to realize I value truth over comfort and reason over mental slavery. You can take that as a dig if you wish, but that’s what I value and how I see it. Others will have different values driving their decision-making process.

4:00 The problem is that Rome is asking you to put faith in Rome. You would be asking an atheist to put their faith in God. Rome can be false (which they deny), God can not.

I am a hasty convert to Catholicism. Yes, there were some intellectually compelling motives for that. In all honesty though. It was an issue of the heart. And as a relationally minded person, the Catholic Church provided me a theology and set of people that embraced my wounds and gave me healing in profound ways through the sacramental life. I don’t think anyone can really discern their way into a church using their noggin only. We are relational beings with real bodies and inner lives not just rational brains on a stick. I don’t recommend all do what I did, but here are my two cents.

Have you ever heard of a Catholic converting to Protestantism by reading Church fathers? I think the Church Fathers point more directly at Cathlicism. The only question is how much of their beliefs do we want to take. I think that's the reason Protestants can read them and not convert. After all, they are not infallible

🇵🇷 As a fallen away Catholic, i struggled when I was on my journey back i felt confused in trying to figure out where to go what church to attend what denomination holds the truth or is it the non denominational route. The Holy Eucharist and the desire to truly receive him led me back. Apostolic succession, and church history helped a lot. Sounds funny but Listening to James White and his debates with Catholics led me to research deeper into things and topics, i just had no clue. If anyone would like a list of names that also helped me feel free to ask, GOD Bless your family and you @Austin @Gospel Simplicity and all of you to my brothers and sisters.

This is a very insightful video! It kind of reminds me of why Muslim-Christian dialogue (and evangelism) can be so frustrating at times; different prolegomena methodologies that deal with facts differently.

It's because data are theory-laden.

I think I can spot the Christ the Good Shepherd on the far right and the temptation of Christ on the left of that? You seem to be a customer of Legacy Icons haha

There is one more approach that I've covered in my videos, that is roughly what David Bentley Hart writes about on "Tradition and Apocalypse." Simply put, considering any church as a living organism, and evaluating its life, paradigm and core functions against what we know about the goals of God for mankind, and the eschatological hopes clear in the bible. You dont get knockdown arguments, but i think this can bypass years of study into details that, in the end, arent decisive anyways. Because one thing is certain: it does not follow that because a denomination has a wrong self understanding, that the denomination is not the one true church.

When I discovered orthodoxy, I took to it like a fish to water. It's what my soul longed for. It got me to live in a way that 40 years of cradle protestantism couldn't. I like what you said about the downstream doctrines because it definitely happened to me in the form of the aerial tollhouses. Not really sold on that doctrine (waiting for the comments claiming tollhouses are dogma 😅). But I think that's a good example of not having to be sold on everything. If I had to agree with everything before making the choice, then it can be assumed that I think I know all the answers and am just looking for a church that fits me and not the other way around.

sometimes, I am just amazed with the less internet-visible but brilliant people whom Austin interviews. How is he able to convince them to sit with him in a discussion - much more now that he seems to be doing it face to face instead through "zoom" like he used to before.

It took me like 10 years to convert because I loved my Protestant Church. I didn’t WANT to believe Orthodoxy was true mainly because it looked too much like Catholicism and I was comfortable where I was. I knew in my heart something wasn’t right with the path we had been on for 30 years but these were my people and for a long time that was enough. After years of studying, It just happened one day in Sunday School. Like a light switch. I knew it was time to leave. That was in 2019 and my entire family of 12 converted as well. God is good. Sometimes people just aren’t ready for the change. It’s a lot. But I am so in love with the faith. I never felt this way as a Protestant. Not like this. It’s different. Everyone has their own journey and I love my Protestant and catholic brothers and sisters! :)

man, I think this is your best video yet! Thank you for being a sane voice in this space that is so often occupied by very loud, vitriolic voices. I would love to have a conversation with you one day!

I see the magisterium as a cult like trait. I will be judged by Gods Word, not by someone who did not die for me. It is Jesus who sits in Moses seat, not the Magesterium. ”But as for you, do not be called Rabbi; for only One is your Teacher, and you are all brothers and sisters. And do not call anyone on earth your father; for only One is your Father, He who is in heaven. And do not be called leaders; for only One is your Leader, that is, Christ.“ ‭‭Matthew‬ ‭23‬:‭8‬-‭10‬ ‭NASB2020‬‬ This conversation occurred two days before Jesus died.

It’s hard to see your Icons but two are from Mull Monastery in Scotland. St. Need and St. Cuthbert. (I have St. Moses the Black, St. Ita and St. Patrick from Mull Monastery in their unique style). There’s Christ the Good Shepherd and the small ones are too hard to see. The iconographer for the Mull Icons is an artist that works with terminally ill children in Romania. Because there weren’t icons left in Scotland, Fr. Serafim wanted to bring the stark spirituality of the Celtic Saints thru this new style.

You make an interesting note on the potential for brittleness in conversion. One of the commonalities I've noted again and again and again with a lot of the "ex-vangelicals" is that they mostly come out of very rigid and fundamentalist branches (though these branches would deny this) that explicitly or implicitly teach that one must take that branch's theology and praxis, and especially its own particular Biblical interpretive framework, wholesale and without question or grace - any doubts about that framework are cast as doubting the entire Bible, so if you have any niggle, then you might as well be entirely apostate. So, if your church is Young Earth Creationist, and you doubt that, you're told that you also doubt the *entire* Bible because of a very narrow view of Sola Scriptura. If your church preaches against, say, psychiatric medicine in favor of "Biblical Counseling", and you or a loved one has congenital bi-polar and needs medication to function well, then you're doubting Biblical authority, and thus might as well go apostate. And so on. And a lot of these people, when they leave their church, never go to any church ever again (believing churches are merely centers of power and manipulation) or else leave Christianity entirely, never considering that maybe it was their church and its esoteric narrowness that was the problem. Put another way, they reject *one narrow form* of Christianity without realizing how narrow it was, but then continue to judge every other church through that same interpretive lens. And if they ever do approach another church, they are incredibly wary of being burned again, and so often will hold out converting because they fear being trapped by dogma yet again.

I saw my Protestantism as untenable after studying the pre-nicean fathers for several years, finding an absence of Protestant doctrine, and a plethora of beliefs and practices that are not present today in Protestantism. After that, I concluded "that which is early and universal is likely to be apostolic." Then to my surprise, I found that many of these beliefs are still present in the world in Catholicism and Orthodoxy. But which one? I think a look at the Great Schism/Filioque, Papal Supremacy vs Historical meaning of "Ekklesia" and doctrinal development migration that has taken place since that time pretty conclusively answers the question.

I think the people who seriously consider Catholicism and end up rejecting it, ultimately don't want to be bound by it. Their acceptance or rejection is what determines if it's true or not. The actual thing stands apart.

"Come home to Christ" should be the moto of the protestants.

Any of the Ancient Apostolic Churches will serve you well.

what good is all of it if you're still a protestant???🤷 its been a waste of time

Beautiful icons of St. Bede and St. Cuthbert. I have noticed that more and more people are starting to remember these great fathers who were the pillars of the Church in the Isles and I am overjoyed because of that. Great icons with a unique style.

Congratulations on the house!