I'd say do some research on it. It was the last thing that kept me from being a Presby, but now I can't see any other way. The second you start looking at the continuity of the covenants and the blessings God gave us in the Abrahamic covenant you'll realize how amazing it is that the children of Christian parents get to enjoy those blessings
My view on infant Baptism has changed and I'm ok if it requires a bit of mystery my kids are Baptized so it's a mute point now . I'm leaning towards Lutherism but I like Presbyterian
@Redeemed Zoomer I am slightly confused. You identify as Protestant, yet disagree with aspects of modern Protestantism. You claim to seek a return to the original theology of Protestantism which now has, in some form, derailed. Essentially then, you seek to reform a church that ultimately sought to reform another church, yet ultimately that church failed at doing so due to the fact it became it’s own church. If I am right in saying that, then I ask you what is the point in adhering to a reformed church that technically failed to initially reform and fails to sustain it’s original reformed values? There is such a thing as the counter reformation. The Catholic Church addressed or attempted to address issues involving corruption. As for theological doctrine, it did not budge. If your quarrel is with theological doctrine, the way I see it is you should be attempting to reform the Catholic Church, not the Church that attempted and failed to reform the Catholic Church.
Redeemed Zoomer said in another video that he is a protestant because he likes the tradition and wants to be a part of it. To me that sort of sounds like idolatry but none of us are sinless. (Not a Catholic btw)
@@davidmckelvey2601 The content of your reply alone makes it evident that you aren’t Catholic. Appreciating tradition is no where near idolatry. Catholicism is as tradition based as it gets. Concerning tradition, his perspective is likely that there must be a happy medium between too much and too little. I think that isn’t a very analytical approach, and rather unfortunately based on one’s feelings, however I cant speak for him and therefore won’t analyze too deeply what he has not yet said (to my knowledge).
@@landericus I agree that appreciating tradition isn't idolatry but he holds up to a very high degree which I think could result in idolatry. Just my perspective I'm not a theological expert by any means. I would love to see a video from him just talking about Catholicism though.
I get what you are saying, but if you watch more of his videos on his whole vision of a mainline "Reconquista", you will see the reasoning behind reforming or retaking the mainline and liberal denominations and returning to tradition. Because as individuals, we have no chance at trying to reform the Roman church, or our modern culture. The mainline churches are the ones that have all the resources, the hospitals, the seminaries, and the huge beautiful church buildings in the centers of major cities. If we can retake the mainline, then we have a chance at turning out culture back to God and eventually even succeeding in the original vision of Calvin and Luther, the reformation of the Roman Church.
Not really. Whereas the ecumenical councils are a majority of bishops coming together to hash out ideas and all come to an agreement, the great awakenings were more like social movements where people actively left the main branches they came from
I think the non-denominational thing arose because the definition of "Baptist" is too restrictive for them. And I saw some non-denominational churches that dabbed on Pentecostalism.
Modern Anabaptists are mainly the Mennonites and the Amish (There's some Evangelical Anabaptists too, they're pretty cool). Baptists are basically Puritans who decided to rip off some ideas from the Anabaptists. As a Baptist, I do agree that our view of the sacraments doesn't really reflect scripture and needs to change, but otherwise I really do love our tradition.
I know this isn't the point of the video, but I found your comments on the Enneagram interesting. I would agree that it's not Satanic, it's just a dumb test that should be taken with at least 4.5 grains of salt... HOWEVER, I think you would also agree that the Enneagram should not take a priority anywhere close to scripture. At one point a church that I attended exactly once (long story, my family was "church shopping") mentioned the Enneagram with a little too much emphasis than I was comfortable with. That turned out to be my early warning sign for the fact that the church had incredibly poor theology. Does this prove anything? No, but I still find it interesting.
There's a two-century gap between Luther and the Great Awakening. I think you're missing a generation. And I don't simply mean that you're missing a literal generation of people: you're skipping over the major theological developments of the 1600s, such as Arminianism, Separatism, and Pietism. This era was the attempted reformation of the Reformation, so to speak, and it serves as a transition period between the original Reformers and the post-Enlightenment preachers of the first Awakening. Complicating everything, of course, is the strand of theological liberalism that can be found in every generation. In the latter half of the 1500s, we saw the first appearance of the Unitarians, who became prominent during the "missing generation" I've proposed above, thanks in large part to the Age of Reason. Their influence managed to infiltrate the Congregationalists, resulting in many of the Founding Fathers being non-Trinitarian. By the time of the Second Great Awakening, they had seized Harvard, and since then, they have managed to influence the mainline Protestant churches even after their official departure from those denominations.
They warn against the Enneagram because they said it was developed with automatic writing (communing with the dead and getting information from these spiritual beings). If it's true it places itself in the realm of new age/witchcraft.
Wycliffe was late 1300s. He was against the CC solely for not having a bible in the vernacular. Citing how the Church had bishops and clergy that couldnt read Latin, either. So he formed a movement of lollards that were basically "street" preachers equipped with english biblical text. I feel like he was making waves for a less than admirable cause. The Church didnt directly suppress him for his english language push. They didn't want corrupt translations that could teach heresy based on wrong interpretation. He was regrettably posthumously burned at the stake for his continuous disruptions.
There's a formative ideology of Anglo-Saxonism that actually says that. That England is Norman and ran by a church not Protestant therefore not Germanic enough but too romance Norman and Catholic influenced and founded the US as a purified Anglo-Saxon no Norman or Anglican influence no Catholic influence nation. Believe it or not there are American writers of English descent who viewed America as the actual English unpolluted by the Normans.
I'm a Catholic but you've given me a newfound respect for Protestants. You're very intelligent and you speak in a real neutral, matter-of-fact manner
Came to your channel after watching your video on all Christian denominations. As a Catholic, I respect and appreciate your views and videos...thanks
I’m Baptist but you’ve actually been convincing me to become Presbyterian. The only thing I’m not sold on is infant baptism.
I'd say do some research on it. It was the last thing that kept me from being a Presby, but now I can't see any other way. The second you start looking at the continuity of the covenants and the blessings God gave us in the Abrahamic covenant you'll realize how amazing it is that the children of Christian parents get to enjoy those blessings
My view on infant Baptism has changed and I'm ok if it requires a bit of mystery my kids are Baptized so it's a mute point now . I'm leaning towards Lutherism but I like Presbyterian
Jewish babies were circumcised under the Old Covenant. Christian babies are baptized under the New Covenant.
@Redeemed Zoomer
I am slightly confused.
You identify as Protestant, yet disagree with aspects of modern Protestantism. You claim to seek a return to the original theology of Protestantism which now has, in some form, derailed. Essentially then, you seek to reform a church that ultimately sought to reform another church, yet ultimately that church failed at doing so due to the fact it became it’s own church.
If I am right in saying that, then I ask you what is the point in adhering to a reformed church that technically failed to initially reform and fails to sustain it’s original reformed values?
There is such a thing as the counter reformation. The Catholic Church addressed or attempted to address issues involving corruption. As for theological doctrine, it did not budge. If your quarrel is with theological doctrine, the way I see it is you should be attempting to reform the Catholic Church, not the Church that attempted and failed to reform the Catholic Church.
This is an interesting point
Redeemed Zoomer said in another video that he is a protestant because he likes the tradition and wants to be a part of it. To me that sort of sounds like idolatry but none of us are sinless. (Not a Catholic btw)
@@davidmckelvey2601 The content of your reply alone makes it evident that you aren’t Catholic. Appreciating tradition is no where near idolatry. Catholicism is as tradition based as it gets. Concerning tradition, his perspective is likely that there must be a happy medium between too much and too little. I think that isn’t a very analytical approach, and rather unfortunately based on one’s feelings, however I cant speak for him and therefore won’t analyze too deeply what he has not yet said (to my knowledge).
@@landericus I agree that appreciating tradition isn't idolatry but he holds up to a very high degree which I think could result in idolatry. Just my perspective I'm not a theological expert by any means. I would love to see a video from him just talking about Catholicism though.
I get what you are saying, but if you watch more of his videos on his whole vision of a mainline "Reconquista", you will see the reasoning behind reforming or retaking the mainline and liberal denominations and returning to tradition. Because as individuals, we have no chance at trying to reform the Roman church, or our modern culture. The mainline churches are the ones that have all the resources, the hospitals, the seminaries, and the huge beautiful church buildings in the centers of major cities. If we can retake the mainline, then we have a chance at turning out culture back to God and eventually even succeeding in the original vision of Calvin and Luther, the reformation of the Roman Church.
it seems like these "great awakenings" are the protestant version of "church councils" that the catholic church has.
Not really. Whereas the ecumenical councils are a majority of bishops coming together to hash out ideas and all come to an agreement, the great awakenings were more like social movements where people actively left the main branches they came from
The quality increase and the new music 🔥🔥
I think the non-denominational thing arose because the definition of "Baptist" is too restrictive for them. And I saw some non-denominational churches that dabbed on Pentecostalism.
Anabaptist are not even proto-baptist theyre their own thing we just ripped off a lot of their ideas
That's the most honest way I've ever heard it said!
Modern Anabaptists are mainly the Mennonites and the Amish (There's some Evangelical Anabaptists too, they're pretty cool). Baptists are basically Puritans who decided to rip off some ideas from the Anabaptists. As a Baptist, I do agree that our view of the sacraments doesn't really reflect scripture and needs to change, but otherwise I really do love our tradition.
I know this isn't the point of the video, but I found your comments on the Enneagram interesting. I would agree that it's not Satanic, it's just a dumb test that should be taken with at least 4.5 grains of salt... HOWEVER, I think you would also agree that the Enneagram should not take a priority anywhere close to scripture. At one point a church that I attended exactly once (long story, my family was "church shopping") mentioned the Enneagram with a little too much emphasis than I was comfortable with. That turned out to be my early warning sign for the fact that the church had incredibly poor theology. Does this prove anything? No, but I still find it interesting.
I think you have a misunderstanding of the "satanic panic" based on a liberal education.
What is a true understanding?
@@oldmate5184Grrrrrrrrr having fun is satanic 😡😡😡😡😡
1:32 Don’t worry I’m that weird mixture of Catholic and Protestant. God bless you Jesus loves you!
There's a two-century gap between Luther and the Great Awakening. I think you're missing a generation. And I don't simply mean that you're missing a literal generation of people: you're skipping over the major theological developments of the 1600s, such as Arminianism, Separatism, and Pietism. This era was the attempted reformation of the Reformation, so to speak, and it serves as a transition period between the original Reformers and the post-Enlightenment preachers of the first Awakening.
Complicating everything, of course, is the strand of theological liberalism that can be found in every generation. In the latter half of the 1500s, we saw the first appearance of the Unitarians, who became prominent during the "missing generation" I've proposed above, thanks in large part to the Age of Reason. Their influence managed to infiltrate the Congregationalists, resulting in many of the Founding Fathers being non-Trinitarian. By the time of the Second Great Awakening, they had seized Harvard, and since then, they have managed to influence the mainline Protestant churches even after their official departure from those denominations.
They warn against the Enneagram because they said it was developed with automatic writing (communing with the dead and getting information from these spiritual beings). If it's true it places itself in the realm of new age/witchcraft.
This was informative and a good place to start. I agree, however, resources would be awesome.
Wycliffe was late 1300s. He was against the CC solely for not having a bible in the vernacular. Citing how the Church had bishops and clergy that couldnt read Latin, either. So he formed a movement of lollards that were basically "street" preachers equipped with english biblical text. I feel like he was making waves for a less than admirable cause. The Church didnt directly suppress him for his english language push. They didn't want corrupt translations that could teach heresy based on wrong interpretation. He was regrettably posthumously burned at the stake for his continuous disruptions.
Based martyr Wycliffe.
The "catholic" larpers were getting hopeful when you said "I am catholic" 😂😂 (this does not represent all Catholics only the keyboard warriors)
do you have a discord server? if not you should make one
Baptists didn't come out of anabaptists
Saying that the Protestantism is "Catholicism" is like arguing that the United States is "Real England," and England England is "False England."
There's a formative ideology of Anglo-Saxonism that actually says that.
That England is Norman and ran by a church not Protestant therefore not Germanic enough but too romance Norman and Catholic influenced and founded the US as a purified Anglo-Saxon no Norman or Anglican influence no Catholic influence nation.
Believe it or not there are American writers of English descent who viewed America as the actual English unpolluted by the Normans.
Be Catholic
@@matalostodos stfu schismatic, you were conquered by Islam on the day of Pentecost as punishment for the schism of 1054AD
As a member of the Baptist community, we appreciate your invitation but must decline. Perhaps the Anglicans would be more interested?
No🗿