Eastern Orthodoxy Refuted | The Protestant Canon.

You’re missing the fact that it’s not just some minor disagreements. The protestant version of Christianity changes its entire meaning. It has a different conception of the fall, a completely different Soteriology, it skips over crucial things like the harrowing of Hades to form a whole different view of who Christ was, and what Christianity is. I was raised Calvinist, but Orthodoxy was the only form of Christianity for the first millennium, it is the one established by Christ, and it is the truth. Protestantism is something else entirely. I could never go back. Orthodox Bible Hermeneutics are absolutely mind blowing and makes sense of everything Calvinism doesn’t.
Of course, that doesn’t make us enemies. Most of my family and friends are still Peston and I love them very much and you guys seem very cool. But i’m disappointed to see protestants missing out on partaking in the holy sacraments, fasting, and experiencing the Liturgy. It’s more that we really feel you’re missing out than that we are angry at you or something.

Lots of repeated complaints

They sound like cage stage calvinists

Good job👍

Another point of confusion is that Eastern Orthodox and Catholics think Sola Scriptura is the same as Nuda Scriptura. While both doctrines teach that the Bible is the only infallible authority, Sola Scriptura teaches that the Bible must be understood in context and in the way the church interpreted the words of God-inspiried authors at the time it was written. Conversely, Nuda Scriptura teaches that the Bible is to be understood in the way someone reading it in modern times would without any other information about the context or historical understandings of the meaning of the texts. Nuda Scriptura was rejected by all the great leaders of the Protestant Reformation, only being accepted by a few radical, blatantly heretical offshoots.

The EO doesn’t make the argument against Protestants based A) who gave you the scripture or B) the list of canon but rather majorly how Protestant interpret the scripture. The Eucharist, baptism and so on which play a huge role in soteriology. The EO position isn’t based of tradition or council but rather that scripture and tradition and council play as 1 big role within authority. You can’t have 1 without the other and rely one means of authority.

So you use an example of marriage to prove your position? I think it’s a poor position because you recognize 2 churches normative authority? 1 yourself and not the states recognize but yet over time accept the church’s approval of the canons because they past the test of time?

Who then isn’t to say that the Jews didn’t have the right list of canons by solely having the Books of Moses which many Jews still have ? They passed the test of time and many Jews claim we are both wrong and say they have the right list of canons. Their two churches approve of them A) themselves as an individual who recognize it and B) the “invisible” and both visible church (synagogue) both accept and agree to their canons.

Even if the EO point is granted (i.e., "We gave you the Bible") it is a non sequitur to say "Therefore you cannot use it or understand it."

So instead to find similarities and stick to them, you are trying to "find disagreements" which results in discord, which is an abomination to Lord, ye have been warned

‭‭Proverbs 6:16
[16] These six things doth the LORD hate: Yea, seven are an abomination unto him:
[19] A false witness that speaketh lies, And he that soweth discord among brethren.

This is an incredibly ignorant video - the EO position and the critique we have against Protestantism is horribly strawmanned and your argument for the canon is circular. Please talk to an Orthodox person

Not trying to fight with everyone just shared my opinion. Dismiss if you want its all good.

Great convo!

Did you just say "top EO scholars like Jay Dyer" with a straight face?

Who determines the authoritative interpretation of the Scriptures?

St. Cyril taught prayers for the dead and asking the prayers of the saints. What do you think he would say if a Protestant popped in and said: "That's just your opinion, Bro! Where is that in the Bible?" I don't think he would say, "Well, you get me there, you little stinker!" He would point out that these are things that have always been believed. He would cite Scripture too, but probably not to the satisfaction of the Protestant who blows off the historical interpretation of Scripture.

1 Enoch is not in the Apocrypha

You really shouldn’t be telling us how our spiritual life should work. The Church cares for the whole person but at the center of our experience is Liturgy. It is worship, which is our primary duty before God and Family, Friends etc. Without the grace of God, we cannot properly interact with Family, Friends, our work will be vain and worthless. I don’t think you have an accurate understanding of what we believe beyond just responding to Dyers arguments. If you want to understand Orthodoxy, visit a monastery and LIVE the life. But your response seems to also miss the fundamental critique Dyers making too, the critique is the level of Foundational principles in Protestantism. The meme argument is meant to begin teasing out a deeper issue in authority, interpretation and presuppositions that Protestants make.

You follow the Bible but which interpretation of the Bible? The methodist interpretation? The calvinist interpretation? The Bible doesn’t speak by itself.

Mocking the explosions of Protestants (particularly young, conservative, formerly Reformed, men) highlights just how out of touch you are. The phenomenon began in the 1980’s when Campus Crusade for Christ converted en mass and no one took it seriously. Now, we are seeing mass conversions in historically exclusively Protestant sections of the country. A few years ago, in my small, Mississippi town, a Pentecostal pastor shuddered the doors to his Church and led his congregation into the sole EO Church within 50 miles. Today, that EO Church is huge and growing weekly. Big evangelical personalities (e.g. Hank Hanergraff, Francis Chan) are moving toward the East. People better wake up. This is way past being a pestering problem. It’s been a full blown evangelical crisis for years and treating it glibly is only throwing more gasoline on the fire. You mention the current issues with gender and sexuality. Do you know who doesn’t have those issues — EO.

I suggest you talk to Craig Truglia. There is nothing wrong with a 66 book canon. In fact St. Phalaret of Moscow suggested a 66 book canon. Craig listed more Orthodox Saints that had 66 book canons and even a 65 book canon. The biggest issue I find is we have different underlying presuppositions on the scriptural canon.

At St. Cyrill & Methodus Greek Orthodox Church:


Her Nikki Poulos, 22 year old Orthodox single woman: "Did you try the Stuffed Grape Leaves? My Grandma Estfalia Made it herself."

Him, 25-year old Orthobro: "I'm all keto. St. Chrysostom said the Cashews are the worst! Isn't it awful that Prods and Schismatics don't understand the evils of the Cashews? Thank goodness for the Apostol---"

Nikki: "uhhhh, okay. Uhhhh, I'm going to make sure my Grandma is comfortable, see you later."

Since this is like the ultimate "debunk" on EO why don't you debate it with Jay himself?

“Don’t strawman us, this what SS really means…. Continues to strawman EO.”

Your marriage analogy was telling. You said that if the state failed to recognize your marriage it was still a covenant between you and your wife. And just like SS showing that you are your final authority, not God.

The pinnacle of smooth brain, why are prots so anti-intellectual.

fallible == not definitive, infallible == definitive. If church authorities are fallible, which is your position, you cannot then claim that EO is definitively incorrect, and that your Methodist interpretations are definitively correct, because by your own definition those opinions are fallible. You can't have your cake and eat it too.

This video is an example of the practical reality of saying church authority is fallible, despite claiming that position, everyone who does so treats their own position as infallible.

Additionally, on the canon of Scripture its similar, everyone treats the Bible they have as a set of infallibly collected books, when you look at Genesis you treat it as Genesis definitively, even if you then say your position is that all church authority is fallible, including the formation of the canon.

I am a protestant investigating EO.

All protestant reactions to anything Orthodox is just prideful rebelliousness (which is exactly what protestantism is) against something they don't want to be true because it threatens their worldview of how THEY WANT Christianity to be. They have so much invested their pride lashes out to protect themselves from the Truth of EO. It's really that simple.

You are completely unable to either understand the Orthodox position, or you are completely unable to question your own position.

Maybe I misunderstood, but is the man on the right saying that there’s a prominent Orthodox scholar who does not affirm physical veneration of icons?

If so, I’d love to hear who that is.

Ignorant soy boys.

Nowhere in scripture it says "Bible alone". So you going out to interpretation is exactly what Catholics do. Hypocrites.

Did you people actually debate any Cahotlic or Orthodox? Or just hide ;>

So you believe infants go to hell?

As Dr James Likudius says Ex Greek Orthodox now Catholic Read your Council's right, Dr James Likudius. By the way Trent horn really beat James white & Dr Robert Sungenis did. Reason & Theology Michael lofton. ✝️🍷🍞🗝️🗝️💯 Catholic, God bless.

I'm not even the biggest fan of EO but... what the heck is wrong with what they're doing?

Lol.... Poisoning the well at the first moment.... You guys are a joke.

Orthodox Understand the Protestant position very clearly, we know what the Westminster confession teaches, we know what Calvin believes and what Luther propagated, we understand what only infallible authority but not the only authority means, we understand your doctrine of perpescuity and freedom of conscience

that’s why we left Protestantism it’s a flawed, incoherent system that just allows each individual to be their own pope and judge the scriptures and the historical church however they see fit

People who have seriously looked into both sides aren’t convinced by this at all, just a bunch of mocking “orthobros” and then assuming you’re right about everything and thousands of years of Christians are wrong, sola scriptura isn’t about scripture it’s about exalting you own opinion rejecting Gods church in history

If you guys really wanted to refute Protestantism you would have an actual conversation with a solid Orthdox Christian only stream,

Then people will be able to see both sides and decide for themselves

You just straw man everything and it’s not convincing Protestantism is the pinnacle of man made tradition

Not Orthodox, but protestants are the same. "Ecumenical spirit?" Between protestants? Get real man. That's why you have so many divisions.

Good takedown of the Eastern Orthodox nonsense. Even more can be said on this topic. The funny thing is, Dyer's arguments against the Protestant Canon would absolutely destroy the Orthodox Canon. I've noticed that most of these self-promoters such as Dyer, Rachel Wilson, DPH, etc, all became Eastern Orthodox at the same time. Normally, I would call that a grift.

these guys really don’t understand the orthodox position

What am I watching, worse arguments ever and I’m only 18 mins in.. try to compare Jews saying this is my Bible is a 1000 times different then what you Protestants are doing!!! We are not taking the Jewish Bible and taking out books that fits my theology.

2nd temple Jews believed and read these book the apostles quoted from these book, then all the sudden you have authority??? Okay.

Why don’t you reach out to Jay Dyer? Instead of making a video do a live session I guarantee he will, but we know you guys are not fit to have that conversation

All those in Asia left Paul when you leave Paul you leave the gospel for today

These guys argue in bad faith and just continually make assertions, all while assuming they can take a face-value approach to scriptural exegesis that flies in the face of the first 15 centuries of (Orthodox) Christianity. Prots such as Lucas love quote-mining certain Church Fathers such as Augustine all while ignoring the fact figures such as St. Augustine were monastic bishops who taught the real presence in the Eucharist, defended veneration of relics and icons, and clerical celibacy. There were no Solas in the first 15 centuries.

I listened to their debate with Fr. John Whiteford today and their entire argument was built on forcing words to fit their definitions and treating John Wesley as if he was a Church Father. I also think it's funny they believe they have a shared faith as Protestants when historically different Protestant sects hated one another and went to war and murdered each other over the "perspicuity" of scripture.

Would love to see them actually debate Jay.

Meth ministries says it all.

Christ did not start his church at 1517

The church has visible members there is not some ivisible church

The wave back to sola scriptura will be like a violent rush of wind! Hold on to your hats! 😂😂😂

So you guys wanna debate Jay Dyer? You could 2v1 and get smoked

The behaviors of the Orthobros bring up the verse "by their fruit you will know them"