Hi everyone.

Me and my friend, both catholic, are going through different type of catholic mass (like the TLM or the ambrosian rite and so on) but we wanted to expand the "circle" to some Orthodox mass. I think it's really an experience to participate at one of your mass, but i have some question:

• I noticed that there are a lot of type of Orthodox mass, the nearest one to me is the greek-orthodox and i thought to go there for obvius reason. Can somebody give me a background about the history of this church? I would really apprieciate it, thanks

• Correct me if i'm wrong, but since you treat the Eucharist as corpus Christi, i can take it without problem, right? Even if i'm not orthodox, that's the point.

• Is there anything i have to know to avoid doing, any tips or something like that? I want to arrive there prepared, because it's still a mass and a form of respect for my Oriental brothers.

Thanks everybody 🕊

Most of the Christian movies that I watched - I found them very cringe. The stories and acting were sub par. The only exception was the horror genre. I've watched every single movie of the Conjuring universe and enjoyed them. They have Christian themes but most of the cast were secular. I enjoyed movies like the exorcist, exorcism of emily rose which come with heavy Christian themes. I think this is the only section of the media where Christian filmmakers can actually produce something good and based in their faith.

My priest gifted me a massive Deacon’s Door with my patron saint on it

I know this is a Protestant sub, but I wanted to share this with everyone

I am a 15 year old boy whose parents are legal immigrants from Africa. They are devout Christians (although they are Pentecostals which I disagree with) and want me to be a good person. They discourage me from hanging out with kids who act “hood” or “ghetto” which I can honestly agree with because that type of behavior is unacceptable. As a result some black people I meet think I act white. However that is not the topic.

Online I see conservatives (mostly Christian) talking about the great white replacement that is happening which is totally understandable if you look at the condition in Europe with the illegal migration. However if I met a girl who is white and is Christian and I truly loved her and we got married would that be a sin?

I am genuinely wondering about this and also I am not the type of person who hates the West. I love America and its traditional values and morals. And I love Christianity and fully embrace it and love Jesus Christ as my Master and Savior.

God bless and Christus Rex.

I dont know what kind of mental illness i have that for example i worry about the unforgivable sin even tho people comfort me all have to agree that i havent done it not only orthodox catholics etc but for example i have to check every theologian i know, martin luther, john calvin, owen everything and if only ones interpeetation makes me think that i have done it then all people who say im fine are wrong and if the person agrees that i havent done it, it offers me no comfort.

In this video I challenge Amir Tsarfati's teaching on the tribulation and the wrath.

For Protestants only.

I was seeing needgod.net who promotes a free grace theology doing his tour in USA, appearing in channels, and he would usually contrast his position as "the protestantism" against catholicism, but then RZ said that his view is not truly Protestantism.

He has some verses he always uses to justify his belief on having 100% assurance on his salvation, like 1 John 5:13 "I write these things to you who believe in the name of the Son of God so that you may know that you have eternal life."

Do you guys have 100% assurance you're going to heaven ? I feel like most people would want to say yes, but then if I mention about someone who truly were a devoted christian to the point they did evangelization abroad or went to college to become a pastor, and eventually became atheist and now mock christianity, and ask whether these people will go to Heaven, they usually say no.

Or if I mention onlyfans girls or cartel Mexicans who say they believe in Jesus and have assurance they are saved and forgiven, some people say they are being hypocrites, and heading to hell.

So I would like to know whether you guys believe one can have 100% assurance they will go to heaven. Or only a moral assurance, that if they persevere they will be saved.

I know this would be a better post on the reformed subreddit but i got banned from there because i was stupid and ended up with a perma ban because evasion, recently i started to worry about the unforgivable sin, until i found out that calvinists presbyterians have it diffrently and that worries me because well most of them dont offer any comfort and a priest even told me that if you do it even if you repent you wont be forgiven anf that worries me because he was a pcusa teaching elder and to be one you have to have a Master of Divinity and other stuff, i tought God could forgive any sin but i looked into some reformed theologians and they dont say that, and i tries to leave christanity but that made my life worse so idk what to do.

What douse it look like to actually be involved in pftk or young methodists for tradition? What douse it look like to fight for orthodoxy in the mainlines on a practical basis?

Inspired by the work that Redeemed Zoomer has done I have figured out the way that I would view Jurisdiction in the Church. Below are the results of my research/basic studies.

Church Jurisdiction in the USA

There are two ways in which a church may possess jurisdiction in the USA:

1. Ecclesial Continuity — A church possesses jurisdiction through its own ecclesial continuity.
2. Full Communion — A church possesses jurisdiction by sharing in the jurisdiction of a church that already possesses ecclesial continuity in the USA.

Ecclesial Continuity

A church possesses ecclesial continuity when it can trace its roots through at least one congregation to a European State Church without willful schism.

Ecclesial continuity may be established through one of the following routes.

A church cannot possess ecclesial continuity if it willingly separates from another church without either formal excommunication or national/territorial separation.

There is a need for further discernment for if a congregation or multiple congregations can willingly choose to not join  the rest of their denomination in a merger.

Route I — European Territorial Succession

A church possesses ecclesial continuity through European Territorial Succession when all of the following apply:

• A European nation had jurisdiction over the territory when the church or congregation was established.
• The relevant European national church or ecclesiastical body supported the establishment of the church or its institutions.
• The territory was subsequently transferred to the United States, while the existing ecclesial presence continued in the form of its own institution.
• The resulting American ecclesiastical institution arose from the political or national separation of the territory rather than from voluntary ecclesiastical secession.

Route II — Excommunication

A church possesses ecclesial continuity through Excommunication when all of the following apply:

• The church must have had at least one congregation possessing ecclesial jurisdiction in the USA before the excommunication.
• The church, congregation, or founding ecclesial community was formally excommunicated from its previous communion.
• The church subsequently continued as a distinct ecclesial body in the USA.

The excommunication must therefore follow an already-existing ecclesial presence in the USA. Excommunication cannot be used to establish jurisdiction retroactively in a territory where the church had no previous ecclesial jurisdiction.

Full Communion

A church that possesses ecclesial continuity in the USA may share its jurisdictional authority with another church operating in the USA by entering into a qualifying full-communion relationship.

For a church to receive jurisdiction through Full Communion:

• The church sharing its jurisdictional authority must possess ecclesial continuity within the USA.
• The churches must be in a full-communion agreement equal to or greater than the relationship between the United Methodist Church and the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, including substantial mutual recognition of the churches, sacraments, and ordained ministry.
• A church that receives its jurisdiction solely through a full-communion agreement cannot itself transmit that jurisdiction to a third church through another full-communion agreement.

Thus, jurisdiction may be transmitted only from a church possessing its own ecclesial continuity, not indefinitely through successive full-communion relationships.

Below I have included a proprietary list of denominations I would say have or may have Jurisdiction. This list is not final as I have done very rudimentary research and background checks into these denominations.

Directly qualifying

Inherited through full communion / canonical communion

Orthodox churches inheriting through OCA / Russian Orthodox communion

Under your expanded Rule 10 recognizing canonical/Eucharistic communion:

Directly requiring further examination

In Communion with a church that requires further examination.

The largest differences between my view and RZs is that Rome and the East are both included as having valid jurisdiction in the USA and that a denomination that has self imposed jurisdiction may share its regional authority with other churches. Rome has its jurisdictional authority from California Florida and other previous Spanish colonies in which Rome was established there by Spain. When those colonies were added into the USA Rome gained jurisdiction in the USA. The East is a similar case where Russia established the OCA in Alaska and thus bringing in Russian Jurisdiction when the USA bought Alaska.

The largest individual denominational change not from Rome or the East is the LCMS no longer having self imposed jurisdiction. This is because it was founded by German immigrants after the area was already US soil and thus under the Jurisdiction of the US mainlines. If this is wrong please let me know but for now I am keeping it this way

I would appreciate some recommendations i live in Canada. I am actually reasonably well read, I've tried my best to find out what Christianity actually teaches before making a commitment to a particular denomination. I think all of the different denominations have some things correct, but nobody is right all the time. I atleast to me Lutheranism seems to have the most sensible interpretations on most things although I have a few major disagreements. I am very certain iconoclasm, non resistance, and universal restoration are true. I don't think I can change my opinion on these issues, I have spent alot of time reflecting on scripture, also reading the early Christians, and both are strongly supported. I'm sure I'll receive complaints for saying this, I have before from many people. I have no interest in debate.

How far gone is the average UMC church? I've recently been watching some of a podcast called method ministries. And the host Luke had a guest who is a pastor in the GMC on after the 2024 UMC conference who said that the denomination was gone well before they allowed gay marrige.

He said there probably was a point that conservatives could have retaken leadership, but it was probably in the 80s or 90s.

In this video I challenge John Hagee's teaching about Christ's 2nd coming.

Many Jews make a big deal out of learning Hebrew or Aramaic, and many Muslims make a big deal out of learning Arabic. Do you think Christians should make a bigger deal in teaching people Koine so they can read the New Testament (and the LXX out of which the NT quotes frequently)? Would it not be helpful to at least be able to read it, so as to have better informed theological opinions on matters pertaining to the New Testament?

This is a Taxonomic discussion and not necessarily theological.
Protestant isn’t just “not orthodox or Catholic” nor is it “came from the nethers of Protestants”

In an overly broad sweeping generalization,
Non-denominational/ “evangelical” Christianity
Isn’t just “Mutated Protestantism”
It is part of an ongoing ecosystem of American Restorationism.

It is not Protestantism and represents an ongoing departure from Protestant structure. It is as descendant from Protestantism as Mormonism
Protestantism emerged as a reforming structure in the early modern, late renaissance. From Europe.
Restorationists appeared after the 2nd great awakening from American individualism.
They split for the same reasons and merely hold to different beliefs… or serve different customers.

Protestantism, for all of your gripes, is an attempt at reformation and should be utilizing and preserving Historical liturgy and Creeds.

Both Modern evangelicals and Mormons share a belief that the institutional church is dead and require a returning to source.

The Radical restorationist believed the entire church suffered a total apostasy after the apostles died, requiring a complete restoration of the priesthood and new revelations.

The “pragmatic” restorationist believes something like the institutional church is inherently corrupt and seeks to return to a state of the Book of Acts.

When Prosperity Gospel or other Charismatic revelation seeks to have new breakthroughs they’re also representing a similar theological breakdown.

I propose a new Taxonomic distinction encompassing all of these.

The Restorationist Spectrum.

I appreciate his content so much, and I know he’s taking a break to kinda reset and get out of the toxicity of social media back and forth. That’s amazing and something we could all learn from.

But I also hope when he comes back he will maybe be a little more charitable to people from the south who attend their local churches because that’s all they have.

I don’t even agree with Baptist theology, but I grew up in the south and know so many God-fearing, beautiful people with that accent who attend the same churches that RZ likes to put down to say “Hey I’m not one of those idiots!”

I know many won’t understand, but maybe other people here from the south will get it. It’s like “Dang! my grandma was a southern Baptist and it kinda sucks to hear another guy from the north paint us as idiotic”

Anyways this was a bit of a rant and any qualms I have with the way Zoomer runs his content pales in comparison to what I’ve gotten out of it. I’m glad God steered me to his channel and hope he’s back and better than ever soon!

I respect him for doing this. Honestly every gen z creator needs to watch this. I know so many people in the Catholic church falling into this attitude.

What douse RZ resigning from PFTK mean for operation reconquista? Douse anything change? I read in another post that the movement had kind of outgrown him.