Protestantism Explained | Ep.25

This week we walk through a beginner-friendly timeline from the early church to the Protestant Reformation, explaining how creeds, councils, and controversies shaped today’s Christian branches. We also lay out why we stay Protestant, focusing on Scripture as the highest authority and grace through faith as the heart of salvation. 
• three main branches of Christianity and why the focus lands on Protestantism 
• the early church after Acts and the five key Christian centres 
• why Christian dogma exists and how the Trinity debates emerged 
• modalism and Arianism as early flashpoints and why Nicaea matters 
• the Nicene Creed changes and the filioque dispute behind the Great Schism 
• Martin Luther’s 95 theses and the problem of indulgences and purgatory 
• Jan Hus as an earlier reform voice and the cost of dissent 
• why salvation is by grace through faith and how works fit as evidence 
• the five solas with special focus on sola Scriptura and sola fide 
• the church as the body of believers rather than an infallible institution 
• why beauty in worship is not a licence to mock humble churches 

Christ is King, Jesus loves you, and He's coming back soon!

Transcript

Welcome And Why Church History

SPEAKER_00 0:00

And we're back. Welcome to episode twenty five of the Ministry of Man podcast. Thanks for tuning in. And this week we're diving into a little bit of church history. And we're diving into so I have been dabbling a little bit into church history, into Protestantism, and you know, the differences between Catholicism and Eastern Orthodoxy and some different beliefs, even going into different beliefs in my own view of things, like Calvinism, different forms of soteriology and Christian philosophy, many different things. So I'm going to give you a little bit of a brief church history 101. This is going to be your most entry-level uh church history specifically pertaining to Protestantism. So in Christianity, there are three main branches you could call them. There's uh Roman Catholicism, you've got Eastern Orthodoxy, and you've got Protestantism. Now the church history that I am going to be looking at is going to be focusing on first of all how Protestantism came to be and maybe the differences between some of these branches and ultimately why I am a Protestant and why I believe that Protestantism is the church that Christ had that Christ would have wanted the most, at least compared to the others. And just the one that makes most sense biblically speaking, according to Scripture and according to the information that we can extrapolate from Scripture.

One Early Church Five Key Cities

SPEAKER_00 2:09

So the church starts essentially when Christ ascends into heaven. So he dies, is raised again, he appears for uh 40 days before ascending into heaven. So initially the church from the time the book of Acts was written, so the book of Acts in the Bible documents what happens basically after Christ ascends to heaven, and then how the apostles go about business immediately after Christ leaves. And so when they start to actually minister to people, to spread the gospel and to go off and share about Christ and about the resurrection. So it's just one church at that point. There is just one belief system. And that remains the case for quite some time. You've got five main cities that are basically the main hubs for Christianity in the earliest sort of church movement. So you've got Jerusalem, you've got Rome, you've got Antioch and Constantinople, which are both in modern-day Turkey, and then you've got Alexandria, which is in Egypt. So these five locations are very uh important in the early church environment. So that's where there was uh a bishop appointed for each of those areas. But ultimately, it was just one church. There was no different distinctions between any of this. They they might have had slight differences, but there weren't any significant doctrine issues.

Why Dogma Matters Trinity Debates

SPEAKER_00 3:51

Uh now, with that being said, there started because there was there was no clear doctrine and no dogma. So dogma in Christianity is actually seen as uh kind of a good thing. There's the the term dogma is often used outside of Christianity as a negative type of term to say, like, oh, they just believe in a dogma. And dogma is basically just something that you can't question, that it's just it's the rule and it's unquestionable, essentially. So the the reason that Christianity says that dogma is a good thing is that you you kind of need some sort of firm foundation to understand what it is that you're living for. If there was no dogma and everything was kind of just like up in the air, then it's really, really hard to uh stand your ground for something. It's very, very hard to live for something. Like, so for example, if we if if you don't believe that Christ is God, then there's a whole bunch of issues that follow from that. And questioning that is going to be really like you can question it as far as like, why do you say that he is God, for example. It's not it's not above asking questions about it, and that's not what people mean when they say you can't question it, uh, but it's like this is the almost like the law of the faith, essentially. Um, so there's certain dogmas that are important and good things to have, they're they're helpful to have for the most part. And so before any of those dogmas, though, were implemented, so like let's say the Trinity, the Holy Trinity is uh is a current Christian dogma where the Trinity means that uh God is one in essence, but three in persons. So he is there is but one God, which is essentially just Yahweh, is just God. Um, but there's three hypostases, which is God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit. So there were some disagreements sort of popping up a little bit because there, you know, these hubs were kind of spread out, and some of the Bible verses they might allude to some different, like it might not be so clear. So, for example, modalism is one um idea that's now considered to be a heresy, which is basically God is one, but not in three persons. He operates in three modes. So he would be God the Father, and then he goes into a different mode, being God the Son, and then he goes into a different mode, like he's like trance, it's the same uh person or the same thing, just changing into different modes at different times. So the reason why that's a heresy is because let's say that there's a verse in in scripture that would contradict that. So in John 1, it says, in the beginning was the word, and the word was with God, and the word was God. So the fact that the word and it says the word became flesh and dwelt amongst us, it's talking about Christ. So like it's talking about Jesus. And so it can't be the fact that God was in different modes, because it says the word was with God. And so you can't be, there has to be some sort of distinction between the two. Um, modalism means that there's no distinction, really. Like at least not in terms of um being at the same time, essentially. And so if that were true, it would contradict scripture, and therefore it can't be true because scripture and the Holy Bible and the scripture that we have is infallible. So Christians would say that it's uh it's it's not it can't be wrong. It's uh there's there's no error found in scripture.

Nicaea And The Arianism Showdown

SPEAKER_00 8:12

Another one is Arianism. Arianism is uh was a popular one that started to grow more and more, which basically said that there was a time when Jesus was not, and so Arianism uh was birthed from a man named Arian, and he believed that Jesus was essentially a created being, in the in the sense that God is the Father, and there's a verse in the Bible that says Jesus is the firstborn of all creation. And so they look at that and they go, okay, well, that means that there was a time when Jesus was not. And uh, and so there was a lot of dispute about this. And so there was a council that was held in the year 325. This is called the Council of Nicaea. And what happens is they they discuss, they they discuss over the scriptures, so they start to debate, and they've got bishops and they've got presbyter presbyters and they've got people from all over Europe and North Africa and basically everywhere, everywhere, because at the time there was Emperor Constantine who wanted these disputes to be settled. It was beginning to become quite unsettling and divisive between what was happening. And so in 325, they call a council of Nicaea, commissioned by the Emperor Constantine, to discuss what is the true doctrine. And as the story goes, Saint Nicholas, who we know is to be where we get Santa Claus from, apparently slapped Arian at this council, which it's hard to apparently it's hard to verify, but that's the how the story goes, at least. So the reason that Arianism they they concluded to be false was that, first of all, again, in John, uh the Gospel of John chapter one, it says, in the beginning was the word, and the word was with God, and the word was God. So to say that Jesus was a created being, again, it would be to contradict that scripture. And in addition to that, all the implications that come along with it, because if you're worshiping Jesus, you're essentially worshiping a created being. So you like the whole point of worshiping God is that we are created beings worshiping the creator. We don't worship other things that are created things. Um, this is what what is wrong with a lot of other religions that say where people worship the sun or they worship Mother Earth or something like that. It's it's creature worshiping creature, it's creation worshiping creation, where it's like, well, no, we want to worship the the creator. So that happens in 325. Now, in the year 381, another council takes place, the council of Constantinople, to adjust, make a slight adjustment in what's called the Nicene Creed. So I've I've spoken about the Nicene Creed in previous podcasts, but the Nicene Creed is just a central Christian doctrine, and they made a change to it. So they added some things in uh basically to understand a little bit more about the Holy Spirit, and they changed it to say that uh the Holy Spirit proceeds from God the Father. Now, that was fine for a long

Filioque And The Great Schism

SPEAKER_00 11:57

time. So from the year 381 right through to the year 1054, it was relatively fine. But what started to happen was there started to become more disputes, and what one of the bishops or popes decided to do at the time was they were going to make an amendment to this creed, to the Nicene Creed. The reason they wanted to do that is because they wanted to add in that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son. To say that the Holy Spirit proceeds from God the Father and proceeds from Jesus the Son. So this caused a great divide, so great that it's called the Great Schism, and it's what separates what's now known as the Roman Catholic Church and the Eastern Orthodox Church. Because the Eastern Orthodox Church, they don't believe under any circumstances that you can amend or change a creed that's been cemented by a council, which you can understand to some degree, but the biggest issue is that there already was a change. So it was originally set in 321, they changed it in 381. So sorry, they originally made it in 325 and then they changed it in 381. So the fact that they got so upset about the 1054, because of that reason, is kind of a little bit baseless, but this is the the difference that they have. So adding in and the sun, they call it the filioque. So the filioque is one of the biggest differences between Roman Catholicism and Eastern Orthodoxy. That's the the term, and filioque just means and the sun. It's just like the fact that they added that in. And so the Eastern Orthodoxy don't like it because there's a certain triune understanding of the Trinity, where if there's either one thing applies to all of them, or it's unique to the individual person of the Trinity. So if, say, for example, like so the Holy Spirit proceeding from God alone and not from the Son is a unique aspect to God. So only He share has that. If one other thing is to be shared, it's shared with all three of them. That's how they kind of understand the Trinity to be. So the fact that they are all God, for example, that they are all seen as God. There isn't two that's God, and then a third thing is like the spirit or the essence from it that's like a lower ranking or something. So they they kind of see it as the Holy Spirit would be deranked essentially, because well, now you've got something where the Holy Spirit's proceeding from God and the Son, and then the Holy Spirit's almost like delegated down beneath them. So that's how the uh how Orthodoxy sees it. Now, Roman Catholicism, they don't see an issue with that, with there being a difference between it because they don't because it's still God, they don't see it as being a downgrade, or that the Holy Spirit is somehow less than just because it happens to proceed from God and the Son. So there's a big conversation that happens around then, nevertheless, to move forward.

Luther Indulgences And Jan Hus

SPEAKER_00 15:40

Another 500 years go by, thereabouts. So in the year 1517, Martin Luther comes along and he pins 95 theses on the door of a church, basically just stating these are all the things that I think need to change that are happening in the church at the moment, that the church has gone astray. And this sparks what is called the Protestant Reformation or the Reformation. Now, essentially what happened was Martin Luther had observed things straying a little bit from the church, the gospel was strayed, they were taking too many liberties, in his opinion. And some of the main reasons for it were there were things called indulgences, which I'll explain, and the brutality and mistreatment of people that even questioned or disagreed with some of the things that the church was doing. So, indulgences, for example, were monetary or money payments that the church would say, if you give us this amount of money, we will reduce the time that one of your dead loved ones is spending in purgatory. So they have this idea of purgatory is where you go before you go to heaven. It's basically this waiting place where it's like they they see it as the idea of they've died and they're not quite holy enough or sanctified enough to be in the presence of Jesus. And so they go to this purgatory place where they uh essentially pay for temporal sins or things that that they did on earth that sullied them in some sense, whether like they have they haven't paid the full price, like the like they believe Jesus paid the ultimate price and that they will be going to heaven, but then there's this purification process that they have to go through, which is completely unbiblical. Like it's it's just not found anywhere in the Bible. You can read the Bible start to finish, and you will not come across any kind of idea of purgatory or this kind of waiting room that you have to experience payment for sin in some way. Like it's kind of just saying that the payment that Jesus paid on the on the cross didn't quite pay everything. They still have to go through this process before they actually go to heaven. So Luther obviously had a big issue with that because the church was profiting largely off of people for this, like almost guilt tripping people. It's like, wow, well, you could, you know, reduce a thousand years from your grandma um being in purgatory if you just pay this amount of money. So that's one thing. Now, in terms of like the treatment that they would treat people who didn't agree with some of the things they were doing, a hundred years earlier, a man named Jan Huss, a lot of people haven't heard of this man, but a man named Jan Huss first actually, he kind of paved the way for Martin Luther to come through. He was one of the first people to start speaking out against some of the things that the churches were doing. And so he actually believed that Christ was the head of the church, not the Pope. So he opposed the papacy. Um, he believed in scriptural authority, that that scripture is the ultimate authority. This is one of the things that Martin Luther put in his theses. He was opposed to indulgences for the forgiveness of sins. Um, so he had many of the same beliefs that Martin Luther had. The difference was they burnt him alive. So he started to speak against some of these things. The church and the institution didn't like that, and so they thought the best thing that we can do is savagely embarrass him, strip him of his titles and of his priestly attire in front of a huge crowd, and then burn him alive. And that is what they would do. That's what they would do with people that didn't agree with some of the behaviors that the church was doing. And what's interesting is that Jan Huss was actually he actually prophesied Martin Luther coming. He says this, and I'll quote, they will roast a goose now, but in a hundred years they will hear a swan singing that they will have to put up with. And Hus actually means goose in Czech. So he prophesies the the coming of Martin Luther. And so Martin Luther comes along and and he really paved the way. He began the Reformation. What he didn't actually want to be an uh a separation, he wanted there to be a reform in what was happening, and what what ended up happening is that another branch was stemmed from Protestantism because the Catholics at the time they didn't want to hear it, and so they excommunicated Luther. But the issue was that there was a lot of people that read what he had written and agreed with it, and because uh because it made a lot of sense. Like they didn't they didn't even want the Bible to be translated into different languages for the layman to be able to read. They thought, no, we're the only ones that are able to read and interpret this, and so we will do that, and no one else will have an opportunity to actually read it for themselves. You just have to take their word for it, and that's why people were so willing to give money to pay for the for sins, because they weren't, they didn't have access to read the Bible. So, and the people that translated it, people that were doing translate uh translations for other people to read in different languages, they would get killed too. Like they would kill anyone that didn't agree with some of the things that they were doing. And so, Protestants, the the the reason that it's called Protestant is it comes from protest, it comes from protesting the awful and egregious things that the Roman Catholic Church were doing at the time. And what else are you supposed to do? Like, if you don't like the fact that you see, hey, hang on, I think this is wrong. Like, I think charging people money is. To pay and and reduce time in purgatory. Like, I don't think that that's right. What else are you meant to do but to protest? Like, if you don't think it's right to burn people alive for disagreeing, well, like what are you supposed to do? Like the Catholic Church was was very, very fond of this word called anathema. And anathema basically means that you're cut off from the from the church. Like you're no longer part, you're no longer, you don't have salvation, essentially. You're damned. If you're anathema, you're damned. And it was anathema for everything. Like you like, it just seems to be at some point it was like, oh yeah, if you comb your hair the wrong way, it's anathema. If you if you don't look left before you look right, and you look right before you look left first, then it's anathema. Like all these like insane things. Like some of so some of the things that are non-negotiable and it's anathema if you don't abide by these things. And this is even today, this is today, is submission to the Pope. So you have to submit to the Pope. Um, you venerate idols. So I don't know if this is still uh venerating idols is still anathema if you don't do it, but definitely you're not allowed to speak against it. But at one point it was anathema if you didn't venerate art idols, it was part of it, like part of your worship had to include venerating idols. Um Mary, you have to believe that Mary remained a virgin for her whole life, even though the Bible says that she knew her husband, which in the Bible that terminology means that they come together as a married couple does. And in addition to that, she had other children. So you're not allowed to believe that she had other children, even though the Bible says she did. And she remained a virgin the rest of her life, and the assumption of Mary, you have to believe that too, that she didn't like her body and soul was just taken to heaven, like she had a you know, you have to also believe that she was sinless, that she never sinned. So, which is like that's in my opinion, that's heresy, because that that is saying that Christ didn't die for her sins, like that she was sinless. And if that was the case, then why wasn't she like why couldn't she have been the sacrifice? Like, why did we even need Jesus if it was just Mary? Like, it just doesn't even make sense. So you have to believe that there's seven sacraments that you have to believe. No biblical evidence that there are seven sacraments, and also they kept adding them as they went along, like throughout church history, there wasn't seven sacraments from the the five churches in the beginning, like it slowly developed. Um, they believe in transubstantiation, where the the bread and the wine of communion changes into literal flesh and blood, which again is absolutely insane. So, um, in addition to that, so back then, so they've changed this now, but at some point, and like during one of the issues that Martin Luther had was that they wouldn't allow everyone to have communion, they would only allow them to have the bread. They thought that they didn't trust people to have the wine. They're like, no, the the wine is his blood, it's too too precious. What if you people spilled it? And so they didn't do it. And Martin Luther himself, he had a lot of issues with taking he would take communion in fear because he was like like terrified that he like something would happen, he wouldn't be able to, he wouldn't take it properly. And so he was ended up taking communion in a fearful way, which is wild. Just yeah, and so none of that is confirmed in the Bible.

Grace Faith Works And Salvation

SPEAKER_00 25:33

And in fact, the vibe the Bible is actually very clear on not doing works in order to be saved. So the things that the the Catholic Church would say, you're anathema and you're cast out for for if you don't do these things, Jesus is against those things. Like as far as the gospel of being saved by grace through faith, the the Bible is very clear on not doing works to be saved. So in Ephesians 2, 8 to 10, it says, For it is by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not from yourselves, it is the gift of God, not by works, so that no man can boast. For we are God's handiwork, created in Christ Jesus to do good works for which God prepared in advance for us to do. So we we have good works to do, but we're not saved by them. We're saved through faith, by grace through faith. And uh and it is a gift from God. And the reason that it's a it's important to note that it says it is a gift from God, because Romans 11, verse 6 says, but if it is by grace, it is no longer on the basis of works, otherwise, grace would no longer be grace. So grace is only grace if it's if works aren't involved, because otherwise it's it's um it's payment. In Romans 4, verse 4 to 5 it says, Now to the one who works, wages are not credited as a gift, but as an obligation. So you're obliged to receive your salvation because you've worked for it. So it's it's no longer a gift anymore. In verse 5, it says, However, to the one who does not work but trusts God who justifies the ungodly, their faith is credited as righteousness. Now, in the book of James, James speaks about faith without works is dead. So he would say something like, You show me your faith apart from works, I will show you my faith by my works. So he's saying that faith needs to have a an aspect of works involved in it. The difference is we aren't saved by works, we're saved for works. As it said before in uh in Ephesians, in um chapter two, verse ten, it says, For we are God's handiwork created in Christ Jesus to do good works, which God prepared for us to in advance to do. So we were created to do good works, but that that is not what saves us. Works is not the root of our salvation, it's the fruit of your salvation. It is once you are saved, you are now from that place of salvation to do good works, and those good works are a sign and they're evidence of your faith. So, but it is not what saves you. So Catholics don't believe that, they believe that it is faith plus works plus baptism is what saves.

The Five Solas And Scripture Alone

SPEAKER_00 28:40

So, one of the main things that Martin Luther uh coined, I suppose, or um that Martin Luther advocated for were what we call now the five solars. So there is sola scriptura, which means scripture alone, there is sola fidae, which is faith alone, there is solar gracia, which is grace alone, solar Christus, which is Christ alone, and this um solidia gloria, which is glory to God alone. Now, um the phrase that's kind of mentioned to wrap all that up is we are saved by grace alone, through faith alone, in Christ alone, based on scripture alone, for God's glory alone. Now, the two kind of core aspects of that that is very important to Protestantism is sola scriptura, so scripture alone, and solar fide. So regarding sola scriptura, Protestants believe that scripture and the Bible is the only infallible rule of faith. So the only authority that can't be an error. So anything else, so any person, any counsel, any creed could potentially be wrong, but the Bible could never be wrong. And so let's say, for example, Catholics would believe that the Pope is the ultimate authority, and that he is the only one that is able to accurately interpret scripture. So one of the criticisms against Protestantism and evangelicalism is that a Christian, a random Christian, could just pick up a Bible and they could just interpret it for themselves and it can just be completely wrong. And then everyone's kind of mismatched because this person believes that person over here believes something else, and like it's like, how do you know who's right? So the issue is that Protestants still have a high respect and regard for authority, so that we still have teachers, we still have ministers, we still have pastors that teach the word. Um, the difference is we don't believe that there's a rule or a soul teacher that is just incapable of getting something wrong. And it's much preferred in one sense that let's say one person picks up the Bible and they get something wrong in it. Well, that's okay in comparison to if the Pope gets something wrong, and then all of a sudden the entire institution is bound to believe the error. So I would much rather risk some random person gets something wrong than everyone be bound to something that is wrong. And that is how you get something like believing that Mary was a virgin her whole life and that she didn't die and was assumed into heaven and or that her whole body was taken up into heaven, like things that just have no evidence for, no backing, things like venerating icons when it's literally like the second commandment is like not to make idols to worship, and they want to do it anyway. And it's like they come up with all these ideas of you know, oh, we're we're worshiping God just like through the idol, though, we're not actually worshiping the idol itself, but it doesn't, it doesn't really matter because you're still doing things like they'll say you have to kiss this photo or kiss this idol and you have to bow to it, and it's like like all of those things they never did, none of the apostles did anything like that. But because of the way that their church is set up, if that's deemed that if you don't do it, you're anathema and you're cut off, then what choice do you have? So I'd much rather like someone just get something wrong, and I can then listen to, let's say, all of the like passes that I've got access to, and we can kind of come to an understanding and we can refer to scripture to to have that conversation just like they always did throughout all of the councils they did. They always referred to scripture and spoke to each other in reference to scripture before making an like coming to an agreement and understanding. They appealed to scripture even during the councils. So it's important to note that. The other thing is scripture is unique in and of itself, it is ontologically unique in comparison. It is God's word. It is what is the the word that's used in Timothy is 2 Timothy 3.16, it says, All scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness. Now, that word for uh God breathed is Theonustis. Theonustis literally translates to Theo, which is from Theos, which is God, and neustos, which is comes from pneuma, which is breathe, which is breath. It is literally God breathed. Some people try to say, like Dan McClellan tries to say that it is meant to mean life-giving, that this is life-giving. But it's literally translated in as God breathed. So I don't know how you can make an argument against that. But regardless, it is ontologically unique in that anything else, whether it be a council, whether it be some sort of um uh apostolic succession, whether it be a creed, they aren't God's word in the same way. And so, why would we attribute the same amount of authority to something that doesn't have the same level of uniqueness? It seems that what we should do is test what isn't the inspired word of God against what is the inspired word of God. So anything that someone says, anything that a council says, anything that anyone says, we should be testing that against what the inspired word of God actually says. That seems to be the best way. And that's even proven in the text as well. So in Acts, yeah, in Acts 17, verse 11, it says, now these Jews were more noble than those in Thessalonica. They received the word with all eagerness, examining the scriptures daily to see if these things were so. So they would hear things in the teachings of the apostles and they would examine it in the scriptures to see if it was true. So they were measuring, oh, okay, well, there you go. Uh, and and they were seen to be like looked upon very highly for what they were doing. They were spoken about as being good for doing that. So scripture alone seems to make the most sense. In addition to that, faith alone, not by works, so that no man can boast. If if it were saved by our own works, we would all be doomed. Like if it was my works that saved me, then oh my gosh, I it would not be good. Um, we're saved by grace through faith alone. Um, Catholics seem to believe that you can just dip in and out of salvation, that like if you miss mass, then you're not saved. Like if you miss Mass and you don't go to confession and confess and have to do your say seven rosaries and do this and seven our fathers, then you're not sat, you're going to hell. So like you could live your whole life, 80 years of uh, you know, unless unless there's some sort of like re that particular reason. But if you just think one day like you're 80 years old and you're like, man, I'm tired. Um, I think I'm just gonna have a rest. Like that's not a good enough reason, and then you lose your salvation, and then if you happen to die before getting to confession, because only a priest is able to forgive the sin. Like you can't just confess to God, you have to go, you have to go to confession and confess your sins. Um, you can't just pray and ask God for forgiveness. No, you have to go to the confession. So there's all these things that like you you just you look at you read the Bible and you're like, how there's not a single person that would come away from reading the Bible and come out with the conclusions that anything the Catholic Church really has. Like, it's just not the more I learn about what they believe, the less I think it's true. There's a a quote that a lot of Catholics and Eastern Orthodoxy like to throw around, which is to be deep in church history is to cease to become Protestant. And I vehemently disagree. Like, I think it's the really it's the complete opposite. Like they'll look at church history and go, yeah, because in the year 750 this happened. You're like, that's that's not even yeah, like it's his history in the church. Oh, they they might even go to the first century, or you know, they might look at someone like Justin Martyr, or they might look at Origen or Clement or you know, these people, this is still like 100 years after Christ, 200 years after Christ, 300 years after Christ. Like some of these people are uh a lot further beyond. And if you read some of the things they believed, some of the things were blatantly heresy. They would not get away with saying some of the things that they used to believe. Like a lot of the really early church fathers, because the doctrine wasn't like ironed out yet, believed some wild things. A lot of it was inspired by a lot of Greek philosophical thought, which is not a lot of that's not biblical or Christ-based and not believed as doctrine now. And so it's it's not really even a good appeal to go to the early church fathers. And mind you, they're not even really the early church fathers because they came after the church had already started, and so you can't really be a father in that sense, not to mention the the immaturity level of the body, like things mature over time, and so it's it's almost like it's probably better to call them without like no disrespect to to you know people that come before you, but that would have been babies in a sense. Like the they wouldn't have understood a lot of the things that we have the the advantage of understanding now because of what they went through. It's not to say that um they're less in any certain way, but a probably a more accurate way of attributing some of these things to the early day Christians would be that they were more infantile in some of their beliefs. I mean, they might have been more uh pious, you could you could say, but some of the things they would do were archaic and barbaric as well, in terms of the whole venerating icon uh ideas. There were people that were for it and there were people that were against it, and they kept changing in power. So one person would become um the emperor or or become in in control, and they would persecute the ones that believe the opposite thing, and it would flip, and they kept doing that, and and i what they would do is they would gouge their eyes out. Empress Irene ordered that her son, her own son, have his eyes gouged out because he believed a different thing. That is insane. But this is the type of barbarism that they were used to doing. It wasn't it wasn't bad for them. They would cut people's noses off, they would burn people alive. So I think you could say maybe we've matured a bit more since then, without that being a disrespectful thing to say, is all I'm saying.

Beauty Tradition And The Church Body

SPEAKER_00 40:20

So at the end of the day, I am Protestant because I believe it is the most true and genuine to what the original church would have looked like and what Jesus would have wanted it to look like, and um it is a a huge lie to think that Protestantism doesn't align with the early church. Most of the doctrinal beliefs, like obviously, you can have a look at what's happening in evangelicalism and roll your eyes at it and be like, you know, this is not what Paul spoke about, and you know, there's there's a lot of lukewarmness, but there's a lot of lukewarmness everywhere, like it isn't exclusive to evangelicalism. I think there's it there's a certain degree of arrogance in Eastern Orthodoxy and Roman Catholicism because they have these grand cathedrals and they might have this, you know, this beauty, but what they're neglecting is that the the beauty, like they have the beauty in in their churches now. It wasn't even them currently that did it, it was it was people that came before them that did it and built those buildings. And the reason they did it is that they just wanted to do a really good job, and that was their idea of beauty then. In order for you to maintain that, isn't to maintain the traditions of the beautiful things, but it's to continue to create beautiful things as an expression of doing good works, so or or as honoring and worship to God. So there's there's a quote that says a Christian shoemaker doesn't just put cross little crosses on the shoes, a Christian shoemaker just makes really good shoes. Like, in order to honor God, is that you do things in your own life to the best ability that you can. Like, that is a uh a good Christian way to live. I don't like the fact that people knock uh Protestant churches because they might not look so flashy or something. Like if you want to say that, oh, the the Roman Catholic cathedrals and orthodoxy cathedrals are much more beautiful and grand. And oh, look at these Protestants that are in this little shoebox house. It's like, yeah, okay, we'll say that to the upper room. Like, say that to the 500 that were crammed together in the upper room. Like, I'm sure that didn't have stained glass windows and it didn't have organs playing and harps, like not everyone was wearing their best white gowns and robes. Like there were there were times where they would meet in the early church in the book of Acts, where the church started, that it wouldn't have looked anything like the Catholic Church. And it's not a bad thing that they wanted to express beauty and have uh a building that they built to honor the Lord. That's great, it's amazing. But to knock someone that wants to gather together in a place and it and it doesn't happen to look very flashy, I don't think you should be looking down on people for doing that. Like I think that's disgusting, actually, because it's a house of God, it's a place where people want to meet and worship. In China, they have underground churches where they can't meet in beautiful places. And I don't think it would be appropriate to mock their places of worship in those scenarios. And so if someone, if there's a small church and they they might not be able to afford some grand cathedral, but they can afford to hire out a room, which a lot of churches do. A lot of churches just hire a space, and that's the place that they can afford and that they're able to get for people to come and worship the Lord. So I think it's disgusting to mock and ridicule church. Churches for not being as grand as maybe like a an old cathedral that you didn't even build in in your time. It was it was much, much, much long ago that that was built. Yeah, I don't think the early, earliest church were praying to saints, they weren't venerating icons, and they weren't worshiping Mary. And they say things like venerate, they venerate the saint that we don't worship, we don't pray to saints, we don't worship Mary, we we venerate. And it's like it's kind of sounds like it's a distinction without a difference. It's like because you are bowing and you're kissing idols, and you're you know, you you're seeking a they'll seek a saint. Particular saints have different specialties, so to speak, for things to pray for. Oh, if you want peace, pray to this saint. If you want peace, I will ask this saint to pray to God. And that's basically how they they do it. And yeah, a lot of their doctrine, they kind of just they kind of make up their doctrine, grab scripture, and try and put it on top of the doctrine that they've already established that no one would come to that conclusion if you just read the the Bible yourself. So like you're not reading the Bible and coming along thinking Mary was assumed to heaven, you're not reading it and thinking praying and venerating icons is a good thing, like it's vehemently against it, demonstrably against it. So I am Protestant because I believe the church grows and matures with time, and in Protestantism, it's afforded the ability to do that, to correct themselves when things go wrong. Others cannot. So we can say, hey, I think the way that the crusades happened were bad. We shouldn't do that. Or I think that people shouldn't pay money for salvation, I think that's a bad thing, or pay money to free the family members from purgatory. I think that's a bad thing. And I think in Protestantism, you can say that it's a bad thing and correct it. Whereas in other organizations, it's it's much harder because they yoke themselves to what they what they would consider to be infallibility through the Pope. So it's very dangerous. So the church Christ is building is not an institution. And in fact, he was very much against institutions and made it very clear that the kingdom of heaven was not an institution. There is no like Catholics will say, we're the one true church, and then Eastern Orthodox says, We're the one true church, and Protestantism says it's not an institution. The body, the church is the ecclesia or the ecclesia. If you're a Christian, you are part of the body. If you are confessing, born-again Christian, you are part of the body of Christ. That is the church. The church isn't a building, the church isn't an institution, the church is the body of believers. That is the church. That is, if you've never heard any of that, that could be such a jambled rambling of if you can even call that church history.

Resources Final Words And Farewell

SPEAKER_00 47:08

I am still learning. If you want to learn more about that sort of thing, Gavin Ortland is I read his book called What It Means to Be Protestant. And there's a lot of there's so many books on church history, but um he's good to listen to. He has a great YouTube channel called Truth Unites. There's also Wes Huff does a little bit, he's he's he's pretty popular now. A lot of people know Wes Huff, and he's got his own channel. He does some some things, not a lot on yeah, he does a lot, a little bit on church history, but he's more in apologetics and defending the faith. But there's some great resources out there, and I think it's very fun to to listen to. So I hope you got something out of that, and I hope I didn't ramble too much, and that that half made sense. Um, it is way past my bedtime. So I'm gonna leave you with this. Christ is King, Jesus loves ya, loves you to death, literally, and he's coming back soon. So get to know him, and thank you for listening.