1
00:00:00,200 --> 00:00:08,640
Attain holiness via literally re enacting the
crucifixion of Christ, and so for us

2
00:00:08,679 --> 00:00:16,519
this is an extreme form of prelest. Prelst is spiritual delusion, and it's

3
00:00:16,519 --> 00:00:22,399
always centered on any kind of means
that replaces the way to become holy.

4
00:00:22,960 --> 00:00:29,320
That's the appropriate way. So the
process of theosis, becoming like God through

5
00:00:29,399 --> 00:00:33,920
participating in the uncreated grace of God, through the life of the Church,

6
00:00:34,000 --> 00:00:41,200
the sacraments, et cetera, is
always replaced with a pseudo means of attaining

7
00:00:41,240 --> 00:00:50,960
that, usually through something like self
aggrandizement, some form of believing that you

8
00:00:51,039 --> 00:00:56,200
have a vision, or some special
calling. Charismaticism as a classic example of

9
00:00:56,240 --> 00:00:59,600
this. God has anointed me and
called me to be a pastor of the

10
00:00:59,640 --> 00:01:07,359
local church. This is a very
obvious, clear form of prelust. But

11
00:01:07,439 --> 00:01:11,480
it's not just the charismatics. When
we critique the charismatic oddities, we begin

12
00:01:11,519 --> 00:01:22,640
to notice a lot of parallels with
the medieval Latin manifestations. So even though

13
00:01:22,680 --> 00:01:27,760
Francis Assisi and Jean Gerson and Nicholas
Acusta might not have been flopping around on

14
00:01:27,760 --> 00:01:34,879
the ground and giggling and having holy
laughter at a Benny hen concert, they

15
00:01:34,920 --> 00:01:41,159
really are kind of the Charismatics,
way before the charismatics. And the idea

16
00:01:41,200 --> 00:01:47,519
is that to prove one's devotion or
one's possession of quote sanctity, it must

17
00:01:47,959 --> 00:01:56,159
it must then require or it must
be attended by these manifestations. And I

18
00:01:56,200 --> 00:01:59,480
was thinking more about this as I
read this really good chapter in the book,

19
00:02:00,799 --> 00:02:05,200
as well as the other chapter on
women's mysticism, which is also very

20
00:02:05,239 --> 00:02:12,800
telling and enlightening in this book,
because as you as we follow the trek

21
00:02:12,960 --> 00:02:20,639
of piety in mysticism in the Latin
West after the phase of Scholasticism, even

22
00:02:20,719 --> 00:02:24,919
traditional Roman Catholics have begun to notice
and admit in their writings. Emj has

23
00:02:24,960 --> 00:02:30,639
said this that Roman Catholic piety takes
on more and more of an effeminate posture,

24
00:02:34,479 --> 00:02:38,159
and we more and more begin to
see the focus of the piety of

25
00:02:38,159 --> 00:02:45,960
the people around apparitions. And if
you heard the Roman Catholic guy that came

26
00:02:46,120 --> 00:02:49,919
they called it the other night,
debating and saying that the apparitions prove his

27
00:02:50,039 --> 00:02:54,240
faith and the Catholicism is true.
You notice he melted down when we got

28
00:02:54,280 --> 00:03:00,319
to the issue of the so called
apparitions of the Coptic Church in Egypt,

29
00:03:01,599 --> 00:03:07,240
and he admitted, well, I
don't know why it doesn't prove Coptic theology,

30
00:03:07,319 --> 00:03:09,919
but it's just different. And of
course he had no real consistent answer.

31
00:03:12,039 --> 00:03:20,080
But aside from that, the effeminate
attitude of many Roman Catholics, and

32
00:03:20,120 --> 00:03:25,080
I'm including under that skittles proclivities,
which many Roman Catholics have actually written books

33
00:03:25,080 --> 00:03:30,360
on. I think there's a connection
here. I think there's a connection between

34
00:03:30,840 --> 00:03:42,039
the bad theology, the skittles proclivities
which are rampant in that communion, the

35
00:03:42,240 --> 00:03:53,319
recent ambiguous statements from Francis and his
Fiduccia supplicons text that got everyone wondering what

36
00:03:53,400 --> 00:04:00,439
it means to be blessing a union
that is skittles, and it does say

37
00:04:00,479 --> 00:04:03,960
to bless the two people. And
they all lied and said, well,

38
00:04:04,000 --> 00:04:10,599
it's just a blessing of people as
individuals as a couple. A couple is

39
00:04:11,000 --> 00:04:16,720
two in a pair, not individuals. Yeah, but elsewhere he says you

40
00:04:16,759 --> 00:04:23,800
shouldn't do that. Yeah, that
just means it contradicts. But whether it's

41
00:04:23,800 --> 00:04:29,879
the skittle stuff that's so rampant,
or whether it's the marry and piety that

42
00:04:29,920 --> 00:04:35,319
has gone into the stratosphere of excess
or whether it is the pre last of

43
00:04:35,360 --> 00:04:45,879
the medieval women's saints. There's a
there's a general pattern here that emotionalism and

44
00:04:45,959 --> 00:04:54,560
sensationalism are really the essence of true
piety and devotion. When we went to

45
00:04:54,639 --> 00:04:59,839
Rome on our pilgrimage a few months
ago, the first thing that really stands

46
00:04:59,839 --> 00:05:01,680
out, and many of us commented
when we were on the pilgrimage, we

47
00:05:01,720 --> 00:05:04,519
did an Orthodox pilgrimage, not a
Roman Cacolic pilgrimage. We went to all

48
00:05:04,560 --> 00:05:10,639
of the Orthodox sites in the first
thing that stood out to us, and

49
00:05:10,680 --> 00:05:19,120
we all commented on this was the
very exaggerated emotionalism of the Roman Catholic statuary,

50
00:05:19,639 --> 00:05:28,279
paintings, frescoes, et cetera.
And every place that we went that

51
00:05:28,439 --> 00:05:31,800
was Preschism that still had a lot
of the Preschism art or architecture or whatever

52
00:05:32,680 --> 00:05:40,079
iconography that was still there was noticeably
Orthodox, noticeably different. It was dispassionate.

53
00:05:41,720 --> 00:05:47,360
It focused on the halo, not
Rihanna's halo, the halo which is

54
00:05:47,360 --> 00:05:55,319
intended to signify in the Orthodox Church
deification and true participation in uncreated grace.

55
00:05:55,800 --> 00:06:00,399
In the Roman Catholic Church after the
Schism, especially the halo is separated from

56
00:06:00,439 --> 00:06:06,920
the head. Have you ever noticed
that, ironically their own iconography expresses their

57
00:06:06,920 --> 00:06:15,959
heterodoxy, then in this life you
don't actually touch the uncreated golden light and

58
00:06:15,040 --> 00:06:23,920
grace of God. Every Orthodox icon
places the halo behind the head of the

59
00:06:24,000 --> 00:06:31,399
Orthodox saint to signify that theosis and
deification is a present reality in the sacramental

60
00:06:31,399 --> 00:06:36,720
life of the Church, here and
now, and not to be excluded and

61
00:06:36,759 --> 00:06:46,519
delayed to the escoton. And if
you believe that the art of a people

62
00:06:46,600 --> 00:06:50,000
expresses the soul of a people,
it's no more evident than in the artwork

63
00:06:50,120 --> 00:06:59,040
of these churches. And even in
some churches where you have a preschism older

64
00:06:59,240 --> 00:07:03,240
cathedral or church or building that then
has kind of built onto it or around

65
00:07:03,279 --> 00:07:11,079
it or renovated the post schism stuff, you can see that contrast in the

66
00:07:11,079 --> 00:07:19,000
building itself. In some of those
old cathedrals, one of which had some

67
00:07:19,040 --> 00:07:23,079
of the old some of the frescoes
I think from the time of Justinian,

68
00:07:25,199 --> 00:07:31,959
and then elsewhere all of this just
hideous novus orto Vatican to abstract garbage.

69
00:07:32,800 --> 00:07:35,959
Actually the Vatican Museum itself was that
way. But when you walk through the

70
00:07:36,040 --> 00:07:42,519
Vatican museum, you're seeing all the
classical Roman era stuff, and then you

71
00:07:42,560 --> 00:07:45,759
get it kind of as you move
through it, you get more and more

72
00:07:46,360 --> 00:07:50,879
progressively chronologically in the modern period or
wise, and then you get up into

73
00:07:50,959 --> 00:08:00,680
like total abstract post Vatican to demonic
Pauli Sis looking trash okay. So I

74
00:08:00,680 --> 00:08:09,360
mean even the Vacuan Museum expresses this
for you. So when we look at

75
00:08:09,399 --> 00:08:16,000
the tendencies of the medieval Roman catholn
myistics, one ironic point that stood out

76
00:08:16,040 --> 00:08:24,439
to me reading these essays was the
tendency towards pantheism, towards dialectical opposition,

77
00:08:24,079 --> 00:08:33,960
particularly in Meister Eckhart, the tendency
towards since sensuous ecstasy, the idea that

78
00:08:35,159 --> 00:08:43,039
piety and salvation and theology is truly
expressed through a kind of pseudo sexuality,

79
00:08:43,799 --> 00:08:50,960
and especially as the chapter on medieval
mysticism notes, with the women, pretty

80
00:08:50,039 --> 00:08:58,039
much all of them were clearly expressing
that they're not getting it, and so

81
00:08:58,480 --> 00:09:05,519
they become histrionic and Jesus becomes the
replacement boyfriend. And it even gets to

82
00:09:05,559 --> 00:09:11,519
the point of Roman Catholic women saints
literally saying that they have spiritual r g

83
00:09:11,759 --> 00:09:26,080
A. S. M. That's
the famous Bernini statue of Theresa in ecstasy.

84
00:09:26,960 --> 00:09:31,840
Even I was surprised at this,
because, for example, there's poetry

85
00:09:31,919 --> 00:09:37,480
by Hildegard of being in and by
Gertrude the Great, these medieval women mystics

86
00:09:37,480 --> 00:09:45,360
that become very influential for the Latin
Church, and they're basically it's basically like

87
00:09:46,240 --> 00:09:54,080
poems that are nothing but innuendos.
Is bizarre. So why would it be

88
00:09:54,120 --> 00:10:00,159
surprising that Taylor Marshall talks about having
visions of Mary and her milkers. I'm

89
00:10:00,200 --> 00:10:03,720
not joking, I'm not being blasphemous. That's his claim. The whole religion

90
00:10:03,759 --> 00:10:16,519
is built around effeminate mystical visions and
has been for hundreds of years. Gertrude

91
00:10:16,559 --> 00:10:22,960
the Great wrote in her Mystical Treatises
in the fourteenth or thirteen hundreds thirteenth century

92
00:10:24,639 --> 00:10:30,320
about the row of Christ and how
it pierced her, and when it entered

93
00:10:30,360 --> 00:10:35,639
her it made her bone of bone
and flesh of flesh. Christ became her

94
00:10:35,679 --> 00:10:39,480
intimate partner, and they became one
substance with one another. Well, first

95
00:10:39,519 --> 00:10:45,000
of all, you don't become one
substance with God. That's not the orthodox

96
00:10:45,120 --> 00:10:48,720
view, and any Orthodox person would
know that the basis of the essence in

97
00:10:48,720 --> 00:10:54,360
interstinction. That's a form of pantheism, and that's heterodox. But it's actually

98
00:10:54,360 --> 00:10:58,840
the very thing that meister Eckhart said
in his mysticism. It's the same idea.

99
00:10:58,960 --> 00:11:01,720
Although maybe Francis of As didn't say
that he became one essence with God.

100
00:11:01,919 --> 00:11:09,960
The idea that he needs to be
experiencing the literal piercings in his hands

101
00:11:09,000 --> 00:11:15,080
of Christ to be a little Christ
is also the same idea that God and

102
00:11:15,200 --> 00:11:20,720
man become essentially blended. For many
of the other mystics of that time period,

103
00:11:20,840 --> 00:11:28,759
like Bernard of Clairvaux, the antibody
posture is so extreme that salvation is

104
00:11:28,840 --> 00:11:35,120
essentially the flight of the soul away
from the body towards a union with God.

105
00:11:35,879 --> 00:11:41,720
But the Gospel is the resurrection of
the body, not the flight of

106
00:11:41,759 --> 00:11:50,320
the soul away from physicality and materiality. That's neo platonism. Other mystics like

107
00:11:50,399 --> 00:12:00,600
Nicholas of Cusa, Julian Norwich,
et cetera, discuss bizarre ideas like the

108
00:12:00,000 --> 00:12:07,320
the universe being infinite. He was
a cardinal, his idea of the vision

109
00:12:07,360 --> 00:12:15,279
of God. This is Nicholas if
Cuso ultimately identifies God with the created universe

110
00:12:15,960 --> 00:12:22,360
while trying to distinguish God from it. So we see then this tendency towards

111
00:12:22,399 --> 00:12:28,759
pantheism, and they're struggling with the
lack of the Essen synergy distinction that Orthodox

112
00:12:28,799 --> 00:12:35,679
theology has maintained as fundamental going back
to the Christological Councils. I mean,

113
00:12:35,679 --> 00:12:41,039
it's in the Cappadocians, but it
really becomes solidified in an absolutely clear way

114
00:12:43,440 --> 00:12:48,279
in the Sixth Council in the dispute
between Paris and Maximus, and then later

115
00:12:48,320 --> 00:12:54,559
on when John Damascus restates and recapitulates
the theology of the six Council in on

116
00:12:54,600 --> 00:12:58,279
the Orthodox Faith, where there's an
entire chapter on the Essen center distinction in

117
00:12:58,399 --> 00:13:07,159
Christology. That's on the Orthodox Orthodox
Book three, section fifteen. So again,

118
00:13:07,600 --> 00:13:15,759
and I did a whole lecture on
the bizarre manifestations of the famous medieval

119
00:13:16,159 --> 00:13:22,919
heretical sects, the Boga, Mills, the Cathariye, all of whom play

120
00:13:22,919 --> 00:13:24,879
a key role in this story as
well, because they set the stage for

121
00:13:26,039 --> 00:13:31,080
what we're talking about in the progress
towards modernity, towards the Protestant Reformation.

122
00:13:31,159 --> 00:13:43,440
For example, the Waldensians, who
were themselves influenced by Franciscan mendicant beggar preachers,

123
00:13:43,440 --> 00:13:52,600
many of whom ended up being heterodox, the Spiritual Franciscans, and as

124
00:13:52,720 --> 00:13:58,840
Malcolm Lambert and his magisterial book on
Medieval Heresy notes, all of these really

125
00:13:58,840 --> 00:14:07,799
become predecessors to the Protestant Reformation,
the Enlightenment and so forth. Many of

126
00:14:07,799 --> 00:14:13,600
these groups also set the stage for
communism, socialism, Marxism. So this

127
00:14:13,639 --> 00:14:20,960
book here, it's a six hundred
page book, very academic text. Some

128
00:14:20,120 --> 00:14:24,320
years back I read it and I
took about sixty pages of notes on it.

129
00:14:24,480 --> 00:14:31,159
So here is my talk on Medieval
Heresy by Malcolm Lambert, Cathar's Cults

130
00:14:31,159 --> 00:14:35,679
and Papal Power. It's an excellent
scholarly text, and it really again just

131
00:14:35,720 --> 00:14:46,240
shows the ideological lineage into groups like
the Spiritual francistems yokam a feor they influence

132
00:14:46,519 --> 00:14:56,679
groups like the Munser Rebellion and those
become proto communist socialists. All right,

133
00:14:56,759 --> 00:15:01,399
so we're going to open it up. Somebody said to the Protestants, stop

134
00:15:01,440 --> 00:15:03,559
barking. Yeah, dude, if
you want to call in, please do.

135
00:15:07,200 --> 00:15:11,480
Here is the link, mister Protestant, and you can call in and

136
00:15:11,519 --> 00:15:16,879
request to speak, and we open
it up to debate. The topics are

137
00:15:16,919 --> 00:15:22,360
listed. Don't play victim, because
it's an open form debate. If you've

138
00:15:22,399 --> 00:15:26,320
come into this discussion, you're willingly
debating. So it's not going to work

139
00:15:26,360 --> 00:15:31,639
to play a victim and whine and
cry that I'm being mean to you.

140
00:15:31,279 --> 00:15:33,879
If you would like to stay a
position or an argument, just make that

141
00:15:33,960 --> 00:15:37,600
clear and I'll give you the microphone
to talk as long as you want.

142
00:15:39,519 --> 00:15:43,639
We are supposed to have a kind
of quasi official debate tonight. If that

143
00:15:43,759 --> 00:15:48,360
guy ends up coming, he's supposed
to come around maybe an hour from now

144
00:15:50,480 --> 00:15:54,919
with a smack talking Thomas Roman Catholic. As you guys know, I typically

145
00:15:56,559 --> 00:15:58,840
give people the opportunity, if they
seem sane, if they seem cogent,

146
00:15:58,879 --> 00:16:04,159
to come and make their argument and
make their case against me. The default

147
00:16:04,200 --> 00:16:08,519
setting is going to be back and
forth. If you would like a specific

148
00:16:10,080 --> 00:16:12,799
five minutes to make your opening statement
or your case, just let me know

149
00:16:12,840 --> 00:16:15,480
that. So don't whine. If
I say, well, wait a minute,

150
00:16:15,480 --> 00:16:18,120
hold on, that's a fallacy.
Wait a minute, hold on,

151
00:16:18,320 --> 00:16:23,440
that doesn't make any sense. Don't
complain that I'm interrupting you because our default

152
00:16:23,519 --> 00:16:29,679
setting is conversational debate. But you
have the option if you would like for

153
00:16:29,759 --> 00:16:33,200
me to hush, and you can
make any argument or presentation that you want.

154
00:16:34,879 --> 00:16:37,039
So you got a bunch of people
in the quay here, We'll go

155
00:16:37,039 --> 00:16:42,000
ahead and go to Charlie. He
was an early requester. What's up,

156
00:16:42,080 --> 00:16:51,519
Charlie? He can hear me,
Yes, sir, I was actually hoping

157
00:16:51,559 --> 00:16:55,600
to present a debate of having with
family members. I myself was actually catechized

158
00:16:55,679 --> 00:17:00,360
Sunday, and they're all Protestant.
If that's okay, sure, Yeah,

159
00:17:00,440 --> 00:17:03,639
you're saying you want to you want
to bring up what their arguments are.

160
00:17:03,480 --> 00:17:07,799
Yeah, I'm kind of struggling with
So that's fun, if that's fine.

161
00:17:07,839 --> 00:17:11,039
I have two that have been really
struggling with. The first is the perpetual

162
00:17:11,119 --> 00:17:17,960
virginity of Mary. The particular family
member keeps quoting Joseph New Mary after a

163
00:17:18,000 --> 00:17:21,319
certain point, and I just I
don't know what to present to them to

164
00:17:21,400 --> 00:17:25,799
the contrary. Yeah. So the
best thing actually on this, uh,

165
00:17:26,920 --> 00:17:34,359
which is what the heck is that? Yeah? It is still Jerome's treatise.

166
00:17:36,160 --> 00:17:41,200
So it's called against Helvidius and it's
not very long. And the irony

167
00:17:41,279 --> 00:17:45,359
is that all the arguments that the
Protestants are presenting are identical to the arguments

168
00:17:45,839 --> 00:17:49,279
that Jerome is responding to back in
the year three eighty three. So this

169
00:17:49,359 --> 00:17:53,039
is a double whammy. I like
to do this because, on the one

170
00:17:53,079 --> 00:17:57,359
hand, not only do we get
actually good extragetical arguments from a person who

171
00:17:57,480 --> 00:18:03,960
knew the languages Jerome, but we
also get a good reply to almost all

172
00:18:03,039 --> 00:18:07,599
of the standard things that Protestants say. You can also point out that the

173
00:18:07,720 --> 00:18:12,519
classical reformers themselves, Calvin and Luther, didn't deny the perpetual virginity. They

174
00:18:12,559 --> 00:18:19,920
even understood that the low tier arguments
like that don't actually mean that he necessarily

175
00:18:19,960 --> 00:18:26,000
did it. Right, So the
till I will be with you until the

176
00:18:26,079 --> 00:18:27,759
end of the world is the same
Greek word there, does that mean that

177
00:18:27,839 --> 00:18:30,839
Jesus is no longer with us after
the end of the world. No,

178
00:18:30,920 --> 00:18:37,400
So till does not necessarily imply that
afterwards it ceases to be the case,

179
00:18:37,400 --> 00:18:44,240
where the opposite is the case.
Okay, so it's not a long treat

180
00:18:44,319 --> 00:18:45,880
use, but you do need to
read it. It's called against tell videos.

181
00:18:45,880 --> 00:18:49,519
I have it pulled up right here. Some other things too that relate

182
00:18:49,559 --> 00:18:55,200
to the perpetual virginity, which Protestants
don't usually think about. I would say,

183
00:18:55,200 --> 00:18:57,319
go watch my video that I did. That's about a forty minute video

184
00:18:57,440 --> 00:19:06,359
on Marian theology. It's called what
did I call it? Mary? Not

185
00:19:06,400 --> 00:19:10,960
perpetual for the theology of Mary,
I don't even remember what I call it.

186
00:19:11,039 --> 00:19:15,920
Let me see. I basically just
go through all of the typology and

187
00:19:17,000 --> 00:19:21,519
all of the imagery that relates to
Mary that a lot of times Protestants wouldn't

188
00:19:21,519 --> 00:19:26,480
know about, like Psalm forty five
where the king, the king, the

189
00:19:26,559 --> 00:19:30,079
queen stands next to the king in
gold of oph heir, and that's Mary.

190
00:19:30,680 --> 00:19:33,680
But Protestants don't typically think, hey, wait a minute, maybe Mary

191
00:19:33,759 --> 00:19:37,680
is predicted in the Old Testament too. It's not just Jesus that's predicting the

192
00:19:37,720 --> 00:19:41,519
Old Testament. In fact, all
of the women of the Old Testament who

193
00:19:41,559 --> 00:19:48,519
have miraculous birds, like Sarah become
types of Mary or Hannah becomes a type

194
00:19:48,519 --> 00:19:51,160
of Mary. You can see this
for example, and the fact that Hannah's

195
00:19:51,160 --> 00:19:57,440
prayer in First Samuel is parallel to
Mary's magnificat. So when Mary gives her

196
00:19:57,480 --> 00:20:03,200
magnificat. It's literally referring back to
and referencing Hannah. Mary understood that she

197
00:20:03,400 --> 00:20:07,279
was linked to Hannah in that way. And there's other texts too that are

198
00:20:07,279 --> 00:20:14,680
going to be really relevant to this, like Ezekiel forty four because Ezeko forty

199
00:20:14,680 --> 00:20:19,519
four talks about the new Temple when
it's made and when it's ready, that

200
00:20:19,640 --> 00:20:23,400
the king will pass through the door, the Prince will pass through the door,

201
00:20:23,920 --> 00:20:29,559
and yet the door never opens and
it always remains shut. What door

202
00:20:29,599 --> 00:20:36,119
would Messiah the prince pass through and
yet retain its shut status. That's the

203
00:20:36,200 --> 00:20:42,880
Virgin Mary. All right, a
lot of homework and then if I have

204
00:20:42,960 --> 00:20:48,240
time, one more question. The
canon is city of Scripture, but the

205
00:20:48,440 --> 00:20:52,160
argument is in such a weird way, I don't know how how to argue

206
00:20:52,160 --> 00:20:56,039
against it. It's all the books
written by the end of Revelation and at

207
00:20:56,119 --> 00:21:02,200
the vague spirit preserved a canon,
but there's never any citations to anything.

208
00:21:02,200 --> 00:21:04,640
It's always just the vague spirit preserved
canon. I'm like, I don't know

209
00:21:04,640 --> 00:21:07,079
how to answer that because it's just
so vague. Well, but the spirit

210
00:21:07,119 --> 00:21:11,240
preserving the canon is not answering the
question of how do we know which books

211
00:21:11,319 --> 00:21:17,519
go into it, because that's a
decision that everybody admits is after the Apostles,

212
00:21:17,599 --> 00:21:19,279
Right, So if you're a Roman
Catholic, you're going to say,

213
00:21:19,319 --> 00:21:22,279
well, for the West, it's
about the fifth century, it's the you

214
00:21:22,319 --> 00:21:26,559
know, decree of Pope Deemesis,
it's the Council of Rome. If you're

215
00:21:26,640 --> 00:21:30,480
Orthodox, you're not really going to
just based it on what the pope decided,

216
00:21:30,680 --> 00:21:33,359
even though we pretty much have the
same canon as the Roman Catholics.

217
00:21:33,519 --> 00:21:37,240
If your Orthodox, you're gonna think
that it's the Council of Trollo slash sixth

218
00:21:37,359 --> 00:21:42,000
seventh Council. So in other words, that's hundreds of years after the Apostles.

219
00:21:42,039 --> 00:21:48,119
So, so how do we get
the right list of books when the

220
00:21:48,160 --> 00:21:52,200
Bible itself doesn't tell us what books
go into it? Because Protestants tend to

221
00:21:52,240 --> 00:21:56,240
think of the Bible as just this
one book, but actually the Bible is

222
00:21:56,279 --> 00:22:00,559
a book of a bunch of books, And so how do we know what

223
00:22:00,559 --> 00:22:03,839
books go into that book? And
this was a disputed thing from many centuries

224
00:22:03,839 --> 00:22:07,480
in the Church, and really there's
no way to get an answer to that

225
00:22:07,559 --> 00:22:12,680
question without the idea of some historical
church having the authority, the normative authority

226
00:22:12,680 --> 00:22:18,440
to make that decision, and also
tradition and liturgy are intimately bound up with

227
00:22:18,480 --> 00:22:22,680
that decision, right. And I
try to make the point that all the

228
00:22:22,680 --> 00:22:27,720
people who made the put together the
Bible believed pretty much everything that worth it

229
00:22:27,799 --> 00:22:30,880
ox believed, right, but we're
going to ignore everything else besides that.

230
00:22:32,240 --> 00:22:37,160
So but it just seems to go
in one ear out with the other soul.

231
00:22:37,519 --> 00:22:40,319
Okay, thank you so much.
Yeah, I'll try those things.

232
00:22:40,359 --> 00:22:42,400
And then my the video that I
did on Mary, which would help to

233
00:22:42,559 --> 00:22:45,960
kind of see the bigger picture because
uh, you know, Protestants will kind

234
00:22:47,000 --> 00:22:48,880
of kind of focus on just one
thing, like well this first says that,

235
00:22:49,039 --> 00:22:53,240
uh, you know until until uh
but no, it's like a bigger

236
00:22:53,240 --> 00:22:59,319
picture, like you need to know
the whole context of of what of how

237
00:22:59,559 --> 00:23:03,519
Mary is the new Eve, of
how Mary is the parallel to Hannah,

238
00:23:03,640 --> 00:23:08,039
how Mary is the parallel to you
know, Sarah, how Mary is predicted?

239
00:23:08,079 --> 00:23:11,240
And Psalm forty five, right,
I mean, all of that goes

240
00:23:11,279 --> 00:23:14,359
into it. And so I would
say, watch my video, what is

241
00:23:14,400 --> 00:23:18,319
the basis for the veneration of Saint
Mary? Right? Like Samshuing said,

242
00:23:18,400 --> 00:23:22,559
is a very Muslim style of arguing, where they focus on one little thing

243
00:23:22,279 --> 00:23:26,160
extract an entire theology off of it. So thank you so much. Absolutely.

244
00:23:26,240 --> 00:23:30,680
Yeah, there's a lot of parallels
between Islam and Protestants, no doubt.

245
00:23:32,640 --> 00:23:37,160
I just follow the Bible, I
just follow my Kauraan. How long

246
00:23:37,240 --> 00:23:42,160
until we've got like redneck billy Bob
Baptist converting to Islam and just saying I

247
00:23:42,200 --> 00:23:47,599
just follow my quarian I don't believe
nothing but the krain Oh but wait a

248
00:23:47,640 --> 00:23:53,839
minute, it turns out Islam believes
and hawdiats I am. I am truth

249
00:23:53,920 --> 00:24:03,799
of something. What's up? Hello? Yeah? Yeah, So I had

250
00:24:03,799 --> 00:24:10,759
a question about if you knew who
maged. Your reason was no, no

251
00:24:11,119 --> 00:24:15,519
anyway. Yeah. So I was
watching a video about the Philioquay and they

252
00:24:15,519 --> 00:24:22,920
were talking about relative opposition. What
would be your kind of like rebuttal to

253
00:24:22,960 --> 00:24:26,160
that point. I just replied to
that a couple of minutes ago. Did

254
00:24:26,160 --> 00:24:29,759
you not see it? Not into
that? Yeah. So the first thing

255
00:24:29,839 --> 00:24:36,240
is that relations of opposition or relative
opposition is at least philosophically related to a

256
00:24:36,279 --> 00:24:41,079
diad. Anything opposition is a diad. So it makes absolutely no sense to

257
00:24:41,240 --> 00:24:45,240
think that we can do opposition in
a triad, because God is not a

258
00:24:45,480 --> 00:24:48,880
diad, he's a triad. However, if you believe in the Philioquay,

259
00:24:48,960 --> 00:24:53,279
as Saint Photios argued, you actually
are believing in a diad. You're believing

260
00:24:53,319 --> 00:24:59,119
in a father son as a unifying
principle that spir rates the existence of the

261
00:24:59,160 --> 00:25:03,160
Holy Spirit. So there's this father
son unity that exists, and then there's

262
00:25:03,160 --> 00:25:10,480
this Holy Spirit who lacks that unifying
power and principle of spy rating or generating

263
00:25:10,480 --> 00:25:14,720
a person that father and son share, and so there's a subordination. And

264
00:25:15,039 --> 00:25:18,640
Photius argues that that's a form of
a diad. Also, if you watch

265
00:25:18,720 --> 00:25:22,680
the interview that we did with doctor
bo Branson, who wrote his dissertation on

266
00:25:23,720 --> 00:25:30,759
the Cappadocians, he adequately responds to
all of these just over and over repeated

267
00:25:30,079 --> 00:25:36,720
low tier arguments. All right,
thank you, Yeah, I'm getting that

268
00:25:36,839 --> 00:25:45,200
video. Yeah, it's called Trinity, Monarchia, Energies, Philioque and Unitarian

269
00:25:45,359 --> 00:25:52,599
arguments from eight months ago. And
we responded to all of these sort of

270
00:25:52,079 --> 00:25:59,079
standard fair Roman Catholic claims. I
mean, the guys that keep pushing this

271
00:25:59,200 --> 00:26:03,240
are basically basically think that you just
if you just repeat what Aquinas said,

272
00:26:03,559 --> 00:26:07,319
like as if nobody in the last
seven hundred years has dealt with or responded

273
00:26:07,359 --> 00:26:11,680
to any of these claims. No, just just just sight Aquinas and that's

274
00:26:11,680 --> 00:26:37,480
good enough. Matt, what's up? Got it? I mute? Dude?

275
00:26:45,240 --> 00:26:51,279
Hello, Yeah, what's up?
Can you hear me? Yes?

276
00:26:56,400 --> 00:27:00,880
What's up? I just had a
comment on just had a comment on what

277
00:27:00,920 --> 00:27:07,960
you just shared on actually in Protestantism
at the moment, but movement towards Orthodoxy.

278
00:27:07,359 --> 00:27:11,119
But what you shared about the emotionalism
and that I'm seeing it's so like

279
00:27:11,400 --> 00:27:21,519
prevalent in kind of Pentecostal circles where
there's this kind of like real push for

280
00:27:21,599 --> 00:27:23,440
like this kind of intimacy with Jesus, but it's kind of like in this

281
00:27:23,920 --> 00:27:27,319
it sometimes feels a bit twisted.
Yeah, it's an emotional well, it's

282
00:27:27,359 --> 00:27:34,599
a feeling based, emotion based,
sensational, sensuous kind of unity. Yeah.

283
00:27:36,119 --> 00:27:38,240
So yeah, that was that was
fun app But my question was in

284
00:27:38,359 --> 00:27:45,079
relation to tag I heard you sharing
I think it was yesterday with someone who

285
00:27:45,160 --> 00:27:49,400
was saying, well, what about
the telogical arguments, and you said that

286
00:27:49,400 --> 00:27:52,640
that basically it gets you to the
point of proving that there's a God,

287
00:27:53,680 --> 00:27:57,240
but it doesn't lead you to the
God of Christianity. Well, I don't

288
00:27:57,240 --> 00:28:03,240
think it even gets to that far. But okay, Well I was just

289
00:28:03,279 --> 00:28:07,480
wondering with TAG, does that not
just do the same thing. But I've

290
00:28:07,519 --> 00:28:10,880
heard you say before that you do
like a two parter where you do like

291
00:28:11,000 --> 00:28:12,920
TAG, but then you kind of
do a holistic No. No. My

292
00:28:14,160 --> 00:28:18,920
argument is that TAG is both parts
and that it's an argument for the trinity.

293
00:28:18,039 --> 00:28:22,880
So it's not there is no generic
God. I don't think there's literally

294
00:28:22,960 --> 00:28:26,240
no such thing as a generic God
that everybody believes in that you can prove

295
00:28:26,400 --> 00:28:30,039
for through philosophy or reasoning, and
then later on down the road we tack

296
00:28:30,119 --> 00:28:33,359
on trinity. So transit argument for
God is the opposite of that. It's

297
00:28:33,359 --> 00:28:37,000
actually arguing that without the existence of
the trying God, you couldn't have a

298
00:28:37,039 --> 00:28:41,839
grounding or a basis or knowledge at
all, because the Christian worldview, metaphysic

299
00:28:41,920 --> 00:28:45,839
epistemology is unique and it thus provides
the base. It's not true just because

300
00:28:45,960 --> 00:28:49,920
unique, but it's a unique type
of worldview that works. I believe to

301
00:28:51,119 --> 00:28:56,279
solve or to give the best possible
answer to the classic philosophical issues of the

302
00:28:56,319 --> 00:29:00,000
problem of the one and the many, the problem of universals, the problem

303
00:29:00,119 --> 00:29:03,599
of an identity over time, the
self. All of those things aren't problems

304
00:29:03,640 --> 00:29:10,200
in the Christian paradigm. And so
the Christian paradigm gives a basis for the

305
00:29:10,240 --> 00:29:15,279
preconditions of knowledge. That's the transcendental
argument. So it's not an argument for

306
00:29:15,519 --> 00:29:18,799
just some generic god, it's a
specific argument for the entire Christian worldview.

307
00:29:22,720 --> 00:29:26,960
Now, the teleological argument as well
as the cosmological argument, any of the

308
00:29:26,960 --> 00:29:32,039
classical arguments just simply assume the things
that they're wanting to prove. So it's

309
00:29:32,079 --> 00:29:37,559
not that I disagree with causation or
that a that I disagree with telos or

310
00:29:37,559 --> 00:29:41,839
something like that. It's just simply
that the arguments assume the things that they're

311
00:29:41,880 --> 00:29:45,480
trying to prove. And because you're
wanting to prove the Christian God, it

312
00:29:45,519 --> 00:29:49,680
doesn't get you to a Christian God. It assumes neutrality, it assumes self

313
00:29:49,680 --> 00:29:56,680
evident principles, and any modern philosopher
at past the last five hundred years is

314
00:29:56,720 --> 00:30:00,000
just immediately going to start to question
those things. And the people who promote

315
00:30:00,119 --> 00:30:03,079
those arguments, I kid you not, they just simply don't care about answering

316
00:30:03,279 --> 00:30:07,440
the modern philosophical questions. They just
say, I handwave it, I don't

317
00:30:07,440 --> 00:30:14,519
care. That's why you don't see
the debates progressing anywhere. When Dawkins debate's

318
00:30:14,519 --> 00:30:17,880
a theist, it's the same debates
that we've been having for like the last

319
00:30:17,880 --> 00:30:22,119
five hundred years. People just regurgitate
aquitas as if those are good arguments.

320
00:30:22,640 --> 00:30:27,720
But they're not good arguments when the
world has moved past the assumption of metaphysics

321
00:30:29,119 --> 00:30:33,440
and people don't understand that I believe
in the same metaphysics that you do if

322
00:30:33,480 --> 00:30:38,160
you're a toemister or whatever in terms
of again essences and form, and you

323
00:30:38,200 --> 00:30:45,480
know accidents and energy and you know
t los and causation. It's rather that

324
00:30:45,839 --> 00:30:48,720
if you're not going to address the
skeptics, then stop doing apologetics, because

325
00:30:48,759 --> 00:30:53,759
skeptics will immediately say, you're putting
your metaphysical cart before your epistemic course.

326
00:30:53,799 --> 00:30:57,640
How do you know that all of
these first principles in these self evid axioms

327
00:30:57,640 --> 00:31:02,200
are the case, and all of
the classic arguments rely on that. They

328
00:31:02,279 --> 00:31:06,359
just they rely on they assumed those
things all right. Well, for a

329
00:31:06,400 --> 00:31:07,920
slow ball like me, I might
have to go over a bit more.

330
00:31:07,960 --> 00:31:15,160
But my other question was in regards
to your debate with Matt Dela Monkey,

331
00:31:15,839 --> 00:31:21,359
and it was in regards to when
you stumped him about presuppositions. And I've

332
00:31:21,400 --> 00:31:25,000
played it a couple of times and
I said him a bit slow. But

333
00:31:25,799 --> 00:31:30,759
was it that he couldn't understand that
you could justify presuppositions or was it that

334
00:31:30,279 --> 00:31:37,000
he thought that presuppositions were just things
that you just thought regardless, you didn't

335
00:31:37,000 --> 00:31:40,319
have to give a jomb but bost
of the above because he thought that by

336
00:31:40,400 --> 00:31:44,079
definitely, like first of all,
he thought he made the mistake that Bonson

337
00:31:44,119 --> 00:31:45,440
points out in the Bonns of Stein
debate, which is that all things are

338
00:31:45,440 --> 00:31:51,799
proven in the same way as if
you just proved something by empirically demonstrating it,

339
00:31:52,279 --> 00:31:56,599
When he later admitted that not everything
is proven by empirical demonstration. For

340
00:31:56,640 --> 00:32:00,319
example, how do we prove that
everything is proven by empirical demonstration? How

341
00:32:00,359 --> 00:32:06,319
do we prove abstract mathematical problems?
They're not empirical, So obviously not everything

342
00:32:06,400 --> 00:32:09,920
is proven in the same way.
So he is assuming that, and many

343
00:32:10,480 --> 00:32:14,960
of these low tier kind of people
make the same mistake. They just assume

344
00:32:15,039 --> 00:32:17,200
that, Well, to prove something
means that you demonstrated through you know,

345
00:32:17,240 --> 00:32:22,680
empirical scientific research or through a syllogism. That's literally the only ways to quote

346
00:32:22,720 --> 00:32:29,319
prove anything. But if we're talking
about a transcendental category, I mean proving

347
00:32:29,400 --> 00:32:34,160
that because it's not something physical and
material, it's proven in a different way.

348
00:32:34,279 --> 00:32:37,440
So just because it's not material doesn't
mean it can't be proven, or

349
00:32:37,519 --> 00:32:40,960
just because it's an assumption, it
doesn't mean it can't be proven. So

350
00:32:43,039 --> 00:32:47,680
that's the point of transcendental arguments is
that they're a different way to prove different

351
00:32:47,720 --> 00:32:52,759
types of things. It's a different
way to prove a non material thing.

352
00:32:53,599 --> 00:32:58,519
Gotcha, thanks, Shda really appreciate
that terification. Yeah. For example,

353
00:32:58,559 --> 00:33:04,200
an Aristol metaph as a book four, when he's asked about what happens if

354
00:33:04,240 --> 00:33:08,160
somebody says I don't believe in the
law of non contradiction, he offers a

355
00:33:08,279 --> 00:33:15,960
kind of retortion argument, a reductio
argument, by saying that, well,

356
00:33:15,000 --> 00:33:20,400
if you rejected the law of non
contradiction, you would be using it to

357
00:33:20,599 --> 00:33:23,559
argue against it, and that would
be self refuting. Okay, this is

358
00:33:23,680 --> 00:33:29,319
Aristotle. I'll you idiot Tomas out
there, he's making the type of argument

359
00:33:29,359 --> 00:33:32,319
that I make. We're actually in
the Tonistic tradition, I mean, excuse

360
00:33:32,319 --> 00:33:37,000
me, the Aristotelian tradition, so
to speak. Now, Aristotle doesn't apply

361
00:33:37,200 --> 00:33:42,119
these types of arguments to God,
but he's applying this argument of recorsion here

362
00:33:42,160 --> 00:33:46,559
to the law of non contradiction,
and we do the same type of move.

363
00:33:46,599 --> 00:33:51,039
We're just simply saying that actually,
God is more fundamental than even the

364
00:33:51,079 --> 00:33:54,839
law of non contradiction. And so
I'm taking that type of argument, and

365
00:33:54,839 --> 00:34:00,440
I'm saying that let's apply that to
God. If we can use the uh

366
00:34:00,160 --> 00:34:05,599
a transcendental type of argument for a
law of logic, why wouldn't be able

367
00:34:05,640 --> 00:34:10,239
to use it for good anyway.
That's so that's the move that we're making

368
00:34:10,280 --> 00:34:30,320
here. Aiden, Hey, go
ahead, go ahead, Hey, j

369
00:34:31,159 --> 00:34:43,440
Hey, is my mic working.
I just have a couple of questions regarding

370
00:34:43,519 --> 00:34:51,519
Roman Catholicism. Okay, but I'm
yeah, it's a big clug, So

371
00:34:52,519 --> 00:34:59,360
forgive me if I can barely hear
you speak out? What my is?

372
00:34:59,519 --> 00:35:15,559
My Okay? Is it loud enough? Now? Yes, sir, Okay,

373
00:35:13,119 --> 00:35:21,719
don't go ahead. I have a
question on a few things about purgatory

374
00:35:21,920 --> 00:35:28,639
cause apparently when you if you were
to ask a Catholic or not a Catholic,

375
00:35:28,719 --> 00:35:30,880
I mean, if you were to
ask someone what purgatory is it?

376
00:35:30,880 --> 00:35:37,440
It might vary from person to person. But I once saw this Catholic YouTuber

377
00:35:37,800 --> 00:35:40,440
called Voice of Reason. Have you
heard of him? Yeah, he's uh

378
00:35:40,480 --> 00:35:45,559
he says that the Council of Ephicis
was wrong. Yeah he's a Giober.

379
00:35:46,639 --> 00:35:51,159
Oh he did, he really did? Yeah, I have the clip on

380
00:35:51,159 --> 00:36:01,320
my clip channel or or Google corporate
quote the role we actually cultural roll go

381
00:36:01,320 --> 00:36:07,119
ahead, Yeah, because he said
that purgatory wasn't a place, it was

382
00:36:07,199 --> 00:36:12,079
a process. And he said that
it like he basically said, it was

383
00:36:12,159 --> 00:36:17,280
the same thing as the sanctification process. Well, I mean Roman Catholics might

384
00:36:17,360 --> 00:36:21,800
think that, but so what what
about it? We don't believe in purgatory,

385
00:36:21,880 --> 00:36:25,960
so what about it? Yeah?
I mean, well I don't have

386
00:36:27,199 --> 00:36:32,760
any questions because I've seen other Catholics
who say, but it is a part

387
00:36:32,840 --> 00:36:38,480
of Hell. I mean, Catholics
believe that Hell is divided into four parts.

388
00:36:43,239 --> 00:36:45,920
Yeah yeah, I mean that they
got all kinds of different views and

389
00:36:46,000 --> 00:36:52,119
positions, but yeah, I appreciate
it. So I guess they can't really

390
00:36:52,280 --> 00:36:58,880
call themselves Catholic. H Well,
I mean for them, Catholic just means

391
00:36:59,079 --> 00:37:00,840
literally the wrong. And see,
so they kind of they're kind of like

392
00:37:00,920 --> 00:37:07,360
Protestants in that they particularize Catholicity and
universality to literally just be one of the

393
00:37:07,480 --> 00:37:14,559
seas. So I'll play for you
really quick here uh, voice of reason

394
00:37:15,440 --> 00:37:24,599
literally saying that ephesis was wrong and
he and the papacy all know better are

395
00:37:25,079 --> 00:37:30,119
spurious. So the church isn't protected
in matters of fact. The church is

396
00:37:30,199 --> 00:37:37,039
only protected only infallible. In the
same way that when the Council of Emphasis

397
00:37:37,800 --> 00:37:42,480
condemned historians as heretic, we don't
know looking fact that the Council was actually

398
00:37:42,559 --> 00:37:47,280
in correct. You hear that the
Council of Emphasis was incorrect when it condemned

399
00:37:47,320 --> 00:37:52,559
Astorius as a heretic. That's all
you need to know that these people are

400
00:37:52,639 --> 00:37:59,800
the heretics. There you go.
Now, I'm trying to find this section

401
00:38:00,039 --> 00:38:02,280
in Aristotle. But the way that
this one is divided up over here is

402
00:38:02,440 --> 00:38:07,480
different than my book. I mean, it's the same numbers, but it

403
00:38:07,559 --> 00:38:13,480
doesn't list paragraph four under one thousand, okay, one thousand and six A

404
00:38:13,679 --> 00:38:24,440
that's what we need or here.
So this is where Aristotol, I think,

405
00:38:24,519 --> 00:38:28,920
is arguing, what if somebody says, I don't believe in proofs.

406
00:38:34,159 --> 00:38:37,079
So he's talking about it's possible,
for example, for somebody to be and

407
00:38:37,159 --> 00:38:40,840
not be at the same time.
Many even know the physicists adopt this theory.

408
00:38:40,880 --> 00:38:45,000
But we have just assumed it is
impossible at once to be and to

409
00:38:45,159 --> 00:38:47,920
not be, and by this means
we have proven that this is the most

410
00:38:47,960 --> 00:38:52,000
certain of all principles. Some indeed
demand to have a law proven, but

411
00:38:52,079 --> 00:38:55,559
this is because they lack education.
Where it shows that lack of education to

412
00:38:55,679 --> 00:39:00,599
not know of what we should require
proof and what we should not. So

413
00:39:00,719 --> 00:39:04,840
Aerosol's kind of arguing that there's not
going to be demonstrable proof of the law

414
00:39:04,960 --> 00:39:08,199
of non contradiction or these basic principles, For it is quite impossible that everything

415
00:39:08,239 --> 00:39:13,679
should have a proof. If we
required a proof of everything, then the

416
00:39:13,760 --> 00:39:19,880
process would go on into infinity.
Even so there would be no proof if,

417
00:39:19,920 --> 00:39:22,000
on the other hand, there were
some things of which no proof was

418
00:39:22,119 --> 00:39:27,800
needed, they cannot say what principle
they think would be more self evident even

419
00:39:27,840 --> 00:39:30,960
in the case of this law,
what law of identity of the things we

420
00:39:30,039 --> 00:39:34,440
don't about we cannot demonstrate the impossibility
or law of non contradiction worth they two.

421
00:39:34,599 --> 00:39:39,440
We cannot demonstrate the impossibility by reputation
only if our opponent makes some statement.

422
00:39:39,800 --> 00:39:43,280
If he makes no statement, it
is absurd to seek for an argument

423
00:39:43,320 --> 00:39:45,840
against a person who has no arguments
of his own, insofar as he has

424
00:39:45,920 --> 00:39:50,599
none, For such a person is
really no better than a vegetable. And

425
00:39:50,760 --> 00:39:55,599
I say by proof of reputation.
That differs that by reputation differs from simple

426
00:39:55,679 --> 00:39:59,960
proof, in that he who attempts
to prove might seem to beg the fund

427
00:40:00,079 --> 00:40:05,559
the meddle question, whereas if discussion
is provoked thus by someone else, reputation

428
00:40:05,719 --> 00:40:07,679
and not proof, will be the
result. The starting point for all such

429
00:40:07,760 --> 00:40:12,079
discussions is not the claim that he
should state something is or is not so,

430
00:40:12,559 --> 00:40:15,119
because this might be supposed to begging
the question, but that he should

431
00:40:15,119 --> 00:40:19,440
say something significant, both to himself
and to another. This is essential if

432
00:40:19,480 --> 00:40:23,000
any argument is to follow, for
otherwise such a person cannot either cannot reason,

433
00:40:23,079 --> 00:40:28,800
either with himself or with another.
And if this is granted, demonstration

434
00:40:28,920 --> 00:40:31,599
will be possible, for there will
be something already defined, but the person

435
00:40:31,679 --> 00:40:37,119
responsible is not Hugh demonstrates, but
he who acquiesces I must get down.

436
00:40:37,400 --> 00:40:40,480
Thus, in the first place,
it is obvious that at any rate,

437
00:40:40,559 --> 00:40:45,079
it is true that the term to
be or not to be has a definite

438
00:40:45,119 --> 00:40:47,800
meaning, so that not everything can
be so and not so. Again,

439
00:40:47,840 --> 00:40:52,519
if a man has a meaning,
let this be two footed animal. Okay,

440
00:40:52,639 --> 00:41:04,000
so, and then it's the next
section twenty one five one thousand and

441
00:41:04,159 --> 00:41:28,639
six. B Okay, yeah,
this is a thing one of one thousand

442
00:41:28,679 --> 00:41:45,679
and six. If, for instance, it might be said that man has

443
00:41:45,760 --> 00:41:49,000
not one meaning but several of one
of which is that the formula by two

444
00:41:49,000 --> 00:41:51,519
footed animal, there might be another
formula as well, if we limited him

445
00:41:51,519 --> 00:41:54,800
a number for a particular name,
not be assigned to each if each for

446
00:41:54,960 --> 00:41:57,920
the formula. If, on the
other hand, it'd be said that man

447
00:41:57,960 --> 00:42:00,880
has an infinite number of meanings,
then obviously there could be no discourse.

448
00:42:02,039 --> 00:42:06,920
Not to have one meaning is to
have no meaning, So he's doing reductios

449
00:42:06,960 --> 00:42:10,679
here. Now it's impossible that being
man should have the same meaning as not

450
00:42:10,800 --> 00:42:15,519
being man. That is, if
man is merely predical of one subject but

451
00:42:15,639 --> 00:42:20,800
has one meaning, for you not
identify having one meaning with being predical of

452
00:42:20,880 --> 00:42:23,559
one subject in this case, cultured, white, and man would also have

453
00:42:23,679 --> 00:42:27,639
one meaning, and so all things
would be one. And thus he's saying

454
00:42:27,719 --> 00:42:30,800
that you couldn't have predication. It
would be impossible for the same thing to

455
00:42:30,880 --> 00:42:35,960
be and to not be accept by
equivocation. So he's arguing here that if

456
00:42:36,000 --> 00:42:40,119
you were to say that words and
predicates could cancel each other out, then

457
00:42:40,239 --> 00:42:45,440
meaning would no longer be possible.
And so this is a kind of negative

458
00:42:45,519 --> 00:42:49,519
argument, a kind of reductio argument
for the law of identity, the law

459
00:42:49,519 --> 00:42:54,079
of non contradiction. So it's an
internal critique you could say by doing this

460
00:42:54,239 --> 00:43:00,679
kind of a move. It's not
the transcendental argument for God, but is

461
00:43:00,760 --> 00:43:04,639
the same type of a move,
the same type of argument where we're saying

462
00:43:04,719 --> 00:43:09,239
that if you took this line,
it would lead to absurdity. If you

463
00:43:09,360 --> 00:43:14,880
denied something like a first principle or
a foundational law of logic, it would

464
00:43:14,960 --> 00:43:17,239
lead to absurdity. It would make
logic impossible. Therefore, the guy who

465
00:43:17,400 --> 00:43:30,400
argues against the laws of logic is
actually assuming them to do so. Icono,

466
00:43:30,599 --> 00:43:38,039
Matt, Hey, what's up?
Man? Hey? So I was

467
00:43:38,159 --> 00:43:43,320
listening to one of your videos the
other day and I lost the video and

468
00:43:43,920 --> 00:43:47,039
you say something that really picked my
interest, but I couldn't find the video,

469
00:43:47,159 --> 00:43:52,000
and you were saying that there was
something that was necessary in order for

470
00:43:52,079 --> 00:43:58,800
the wicked to be resurrected justifiably,
I guess, And you were using this

471
00:43:59,000 --> 00:44:04,599
argument I think against Oh. I
think you're talking about the fact that can

472
00:44:04,639 --> 00:44:08,840
you mute it's equally Oh yeah,
right, So I think you were talking

473
00:44:08,880 --> 00:44:13,199
about the question that arises as to
why all men are resurrected. If Christ

474
00:44:13,400 --> 00:44:17,559
ultimately, say in Calvinism or in
Augustinianism, if he only dies ultimately to

475
00:44:17,639 --> 00:44:23,079
save the elect then why would all
of the wicked also be resurrected in the

476
00:44:23,159 --> 00:44:27,039
City of God. Augustine struggles with
this, and he kind of speculates and

477
00:44:27,079 --> 00:44:30,400
throws out a bunch of different theories. But the real issue is just simply

478
00:44:30,440 --> 00:44:37,880
that there's no doctrine of recapitulation in
Protestantism or almost all of Roman Catholicism.

479
00:44:37,400 --> 00:44:42,519
Maybe some Uniates or Byzantine Catholics could
somehow argue that they believe in it.

480
00:44:42,599 --> 00:44:45,880
I don't know, maybe there's some, but it's a distinctive feature that's common

481
00:44:45,960 --> 00:44:50,760
and well known in Orthodox theology and
it's part and parcel of the doctrine of

482
00:44:50,760 --> 00:44:54,039
the heroine of Hades. And so
the heroin of Hades means that Christ destroys

483
00:44:54,079 --> 00:45:00,000
the power of Say over our nature. Thus all of human nature, universe

484
00:45:00,320 --> 00:45:07,239
human nature is assumed and redeemed in
Christ. This is why Irenaeus against Heresies

485
00:45:07,280 --> 00:45:12,679
has a whole section where he talks
about the recapitulation. Christ recapitulated, recapitulated

486
00:45:13,159 --> 00:45:19,119
everything that Adam lost. And so
if allah one griety is fifteen death spreads

487
00:45:19,159 --> 00:45:25,159
to all human beings, then Christ
must then spread resurrection to all human beings

488
00:45:25,760 --> 00:45:32,519
just as expansive as Adams fall.
So it doesn't make any sense to then

489
00:45:32,800 --> 00:45:39,599
believe in limited atonement or these Calvinist
positions on that basis. Gotcha, And

490
00:45:39,719 --> 00:45:45,559
do you have any commentaries on a
Gusts and the City of God? Yes,

491
00:45:45,639 --> 00:45:47,960
I actually have a lecture through the
entire City of God or the two

492
00:45:49,039 --> 00:45:52,960
part lecture. It's about four hours
maybe, Okay, awesome, I appreciate

493
00:45:52,039 --> 00:45:55,679
you, Jay, Thank you.
Also, any of the critiques of Calvinism,

494
00:45:55,880 --> 00:46:06,239
I typically bring that issue up.
Now I did find this, this

495
00:46:06,440 --> 00:46:13,239
is a great point here about retortion. How far does retortion reach and what

496
00:46:13,320 --> 00:46:16,039
does it prove? Retortion is a
philosophical procedure whereby one attempts to establish a

497
00:46:16,119 --> 00:46:22,599
thesis by uncovering and performative inconsistency in
anyone who denies it. It is as

498
00:46:22,719 --> 00:46:25,840
old as Aristotle, and it has
been followed and used by philosophers as dessert

499
00:46:27,000 --> 00:46:30,400
diverse as transcendental tomasts. Now you
might think that, wait a minute,

500
00:46:30,440 --> 00:46:36,519
if you're a transcendental argument proponent,
does that mean you're in line with transcendental

501
00:46:36,559 --> 00:46:40,119
tomass. This just simply means that
in the modern era there have been Thomas

502
00:46:40,320 --> 00:46:45,119
who have actually, yes, adopted, believe it or not, transcendental arguments.

503
00:46:45,639 --> 00:46:47,280
And that's because, as you heard
me point out all the time,

504
00:46:47,519 --> 00:46:54,480
transcendental argumentation is not new to Calvin, It's not new to Van Till or

505
00:46:54,559 --> 00:47:00,639
Bonson. It's a principle that goes
back to Aristotle. I just read you

506
00:47:00,719 --> 00:47:06,559
the section of Metaphysics, Book four
Aristotle where it's referenced. I think it

507
00:47:06,639 --> 00:47:09,280
comes up in other places too.
The idea, I think is also present

508
00:47:09,320 --> 00:47:15,239
in some of the dialogue that some
presuppositional ideas are also present in the dialogues

509
00:47:15,280 --> 00:47:27,880
of Plato and so as this philosophical
blog here is noting it's not new,

510
00:47:28,360 --> 00:47:30,119
all right. John Damascus, in
book one of the fount of Knowledge,

511
00:47:30,280 --> 00:47:35,599
utilizes the same idea, this same
type of argument. In fact, I've

512
00:47:35,599 --> 00:47:42,719
actually I forgot to actually have Fount
of Knowledge pulled up and if I remember,

513
00:47:42,800 --> 00:48:17,760
it's the first chapter. Yeah,
it's actually I think the here early

514
00:48:17,840 --> 00:48:22,440
on in chapter three and he's saying, he's talking about what is philosophy?

515
00:48:22,440 --> 00:48:25,800
I don't know. For those that
don't know, John Damascus wrote a famous

516
00:48:27,599 --> 00:48:36,599
introductory text that's very Aristotelian on introducing
people to the philosophical concepts that are used

517
00:48:36,679 --> 00:48:40,000
in theological literature. It's called the
Fount of Knowledge, and he says,

518
00:48:40,599 --> 00:48:44,559
there are some people, whoever,
who have endeavored to do it away entirely

519
00:48:44,639 --> 00:48:49,639
with philosophy, asserting that it does
not exist, or that there's no such

520
00:48:49,719 --> 00:48:53,760
thing as knowledge or perception. We
would answer them by asking, how is

521
00:48:53,800 --> 00:48:58,079
it you say that there's no philosophy, knowledge or perception. Do you know

522
00:48:58,320 --> 00:49:01,519
or perceive that there is no knowledge
philosopher or perception? Or is it by

523
00:49:01,639 --> 00:49:06,559
not knowing or perceiving it. If
you perceive it, then you have knowledge

524
00:49:06,639 --> 00:49:08,840
and perception. But if it is
by your not knowing it, then no

525
00:49:08,920 --> 00:49:13,679
one will believe you because you're basically
saying you have no knowledge. This is

526
00:49:13,760 --> 00:49:19,800
a transcendental type of argument, a
reductio retorsion argument. Thus, as you

527
00:49:19,880 --> 00:49:25,320
can see, retortion, as is
pointed out here, is used in the

528
00:49:25,440 --> 00:49:31,360
Aristotelian tradition, and thus why there
would be transcendental tomist. But to be

529
00:49:31,519 --> 00:49:37,079
very clear here, there are not, to my knowledge, any thomists who

530
00:49:37,239 --> 00:49:40,880
use the transcendental argument for God.
You see, so that's the difference here.

531
00:49:43,000 --> 00:49:49,079
But transcendental arguments contrary to these idiotomists
who don't know anything, don't even

532
00:49:49,159 --> 00:49:52,760
know that their own tradition as people
using transcendental arguments, and that it goes

533
00:49:52,840 --> 00:49:59,719
back to Aristotle and John Damascus.
It's a form that you see here in

534
00:49:59,800 --> 00:50:04,800
real well John de mask is doing
right. Here is retortion. It's outlined

535
00:50:04,840 --> 00:50:14,639
here in this well known Catholic philosophy
blog. Proofs by retortion have this form.

536
00:50:14,840 --> 00:50:20,800
Proposition P is such that anyone who
denies it falls into the performative inconsistency.

537
00:50:21,320 --> 00:50:24,880
Therefore, ergo P is true.
Suppose that a person says that there

538
00:50:24,920 --> 00:50:31,840
are no assertions. This would be
a performative inconsistency. The propositional content of

539
00:50:31,920 --> 00:50:37,320
the speech act is inconsistent with the
performance. There are no assertions. Is

540
00:50:37,400 --> 00:50:44,519
the propositional content of asserting your asserting, that is the proposition. Thus the

541
00:50:44,559 --> 00:50:49,440
speech act in this case is the
performance. The inconsistency is not strictly logical,

542
00:50:50,559 --> 00:50:55,639
but strictly logical inconsistency obtains between propositions, and thus the performance as such

543
00:50:55,920 --> 00:51:00,599
is not a proposition, such as
asserting performances belong to the category of events

544
00:51:00,679 --> 00:51:04,599
and not a proposition. And yet
it is clear that there is some sort

545
00:51:04,599 --> 00:51:08,519
of analog inconsistency going on here,
some sort of analog of contradiction. The

546
00:51:08,679 --> 00:51:14,960
content asserted is falsified by the action
of asserting it. This is everything that

547
00:51:15,039 --> 00:51:21,880
we do all the time when we
do the transcendental argument against people who or

548
00:51:21,920 --> 00:51:29,519
atheists or materialists or whatever. So
again, for the slow boys out there,

549
00:51:30,000 --> 00:51:35,360
I am not saying that this is
the transcendental argument for God. It

550
00:51:35,519 --> 00:51:42,400
is a form of argument that shows
that is inconsistent and contradictory to deny things

551
00:51:42,599 --> 00:51:46,920
that you're using. So everybody see
that. Do you see that what this

552
00:51:47,079 --> 00:51:52,760
guy right here, who I assume
is a Catholic. I don't know what

553
00:51:52,840 --> 00:51:59,480
he is, blogger, philosophy,
blogger here, it's no different than what's

554
00:51:59,519 --> 00:52:04,639
being said right here in John Damascus. And that's basically the same thing that

555
00:52:04,800 --> 00:52:09,800
was being done and said in the
Aristotle passage that we read from Metaphysics book

556
00:52:09,840 --> 00:52:21,079
four. Mmo something moist, mojave
or no? I'm sorry, Steve,

557
00:52:21,199 --> 00:52:27,920
what's up? Oh? What's up? Jay? I'm just wondering when you

558
00:52:28,000 --> 00:52:32,920
are arguing the transcendental argument and you
get like an atheist to realize that they

559
00:52:34,000 --> 00:52:37,960
can't justify or trust their logic.
Therefore the world he built upon that is

560
00:52:37,239 --> 00:52:42,360
also like, you can't trust it. When you get them to realize that

561
00:52:42,519 --> 00:52:47,920
and they're still just like, well, they still believe it anyway, because

562
00:52:49,280 --> 00:52:52,599
the logic to them feels real.
What do you do at that point?

563
00:52:52,679 --> 00:52:57,159
Do you just well, that's just
called being arbitrary. I mean, the

564
00:52:57,239 --> 00:53:00,519
fact that it feels real. I
mean, I think we all have an

565
00:53:00,559 --> 00:53:04,199
inner sense that logic is the case, right, that two plus two does

566
00:53:04,280 --> 00:53:09,320
equal four. Right. We have
an inner sense of immediacy that that's correct.

567
00:53:10,559 --> 00:53:15,079
But even though in that limited sense
we could talk about something being self

568
00:53:15,119 --> 00:53:20,119
evident, that doesn't mean that I
can just say and appeal to self evidence

569
00:53:20,719 --> 00:53:24,800
to have justification for that. So
the sense that we have that things are

570
00:53:24,840 --> 00:53:30,440
immediately true something like, doesn't it
kind of seem in an immediate sense that

571
00:53:31,119 --> 00:53:36,239
a equals a right the law of
identity, Yeah, it seems to be

572
00:53:36,400 --> 00:53:42,960
pretty obviously true. But I can't
appeal to the seeming self evidence of something

573
00:53:43,800 --> 00:53:49,480
as an epistemic justification. So that's
why it's two different things. Cool,

574
00:53:49,559 --> 00:53:52,239
So they just you sort of just
have to let them go if they want

575
00:53:52,280 --> 00:53:54,360
to believe that it's well, if
they want to go that reale, then

576
00:53:54,920 --> 00:53:59,960
you've done your job as an apologist
because they don't have any way to argue

577
00:54:00,000 --> 00:54:07,639
against Christianity. Beautiful, And just
one more, how do you refute like

578
00:54:07,880 --> 00:54:12,719
the idea of determinism. I get
that, like it's pointless if we do

579
00:54:13,320 --> 00:54:15,239
live in a deterministic world to happen. Well, if you watch the debate

580
00:54:15,440 --> 00:54:21,320
some years back with JF the whole
focus of that debate was the deterministic fallacy

581
00:54:21,440 --> 00:54:24,840
or the naturalist fallacy, which is, if you say that all reality is

582
00:54:24,960 --> 00:54:30,480
determined, then you are also part
of the determined reality and all of the

583
00:54:30,480 --> 00:54:34,960
beliefs that you have that you've come
to know the true versus the false are

584
00:54:35,159 --> 00:54:38,679
wiped away because you didn't really discover
the true or the false, because all

585
00:54:38,760 --> 00:54:44,239
things are just a determined chemical process. So it actually removes the possibility of

586
00:54:44,360 --> 00:54:50,079
knowing true propositions if you're consistent.
It removes responsibility. Right. If you

587
00:54:50,079 --> 00:54:53,440
remember in the debate, if you
ever saw that JF was talking about that

588
00:54:54,239 --> 00:54:57,880
he had written this for that book, and I said, well, if

589
00:54:57,960 --> 00:55:00,760
determinism is true, you didn't actually
write your book. So it's inconsistent for

590
00:55:00,840 --> 00:55:06,599
you to want to have praise and
accolades for writing a book when on the

591
00:55:06,639 --> 00:55:09,960
other hand, you're saying that you
don't believe in free will and responsibility volition.

592
00:55:10,639 --> 00:55:16,199
You didn't actually write your book,
right, I think I understand what

593
00:55:16,280 --> 00:55:22,199
you're saying. But that's also just
like attacking him being able to argue,

594
00:55:22,400 --> 00:55:24,880
as opposed to attacking like the possibility
of determination. No, No, it's

595
00:55:24,920 --> 00:55:29,960
saying that you couldn't know that determinism
is true, right, because you're pre

596
00:55:30,119 --> 00:55:31,880
programmed to say whatever you want.
No, yeah, there is no true

597
00:55:31,960 --> 00:55:38,159
versus false. There's only what is
determined, Okay, So there's no way

598
00:55:38,239 --> 00:55:43,199
for you to know either way if
it is correct, because if there's no

599
00:55:43,400 --> 00:55:50,039
if reality is ultimately disteleological, it
has no intentionality and purpose, then there's

600
00:55:50,119 --> 00:55:54,119
only what is. There's no true
versus false, good versus bad, there's

601
00:55:54,199 --> 00:55:59,119
literally just chemical reactions. Yeah,
okay, perfect. And so when you

602
00:55:59,239 --> 00:56:01,760
try to say, well, this
is true versus this is false, that's

603
00:56:01,920 --> 00:56:09,159
violating the metaphysical principle of determinism.
Beautiful. There is no true in false

604
00:56:09,239 --> 00:56:16,840
or just what it is? Great
questions auto, and then we'll go to

605
00:56:16,880 --> 00:56:38,199
anatoly. So like, if I'm
using the auto, are you either If

606
00:56:38,239 --> 00:56:46,400
I say the universe is ultimately dysteleological
and that that makes knowledge impossible, that's

607
00:56:46,719 --> 00:56:52,800
a transcendental form of a teleological argument. It's not the classical teleological argument.

608
00:56:53,119 --> 00:56:58,239
So you see, you can use
arguments from causation or arguments from teleology,

609
00:56:59,199 --> 00:57:01,480
but I think a better way to
argue it is to argue that there must

610
00:57:01,599 --> 00:57:06,840
be causation and teleology to have knowledge
at all. There are they are preconditions

611
00:57:06,840 --> 00:57:12,920
of the possibility of knowledge. That's
a better way of arguing the teleological argument

612
00:57:12,960 --> 00:57:16,639
than saying, I see design in
the world, there must be a designer.

613
00:57:16,719 --> 00:57:23,199
I mean, it's just it's just
such a bad argument. All right,

614
00:57:23,320 --> 00:57:25,159
that got dropped off. Do you
want to come back? Auto?

615
00:57:25,239 --> 00:57:35,119
What's up? Thank you guys for
tuning in tonight. Welcome everybody would like

616
00:57:35,199 --> 00:57:40,559
and share. We're doing a nighttime
stream having fun on a day before fourth

617
00:57:40,639 --> 00:57:44,559
of July. What's up? Auto, We got an unmute man. You

618
00:57:44,639 --> 00:57:52,679
can support the stream via superjets.
Hiji. I'm an Orthodox Christian from Georgia

619
00:57:52,800 --> 00:57:58,719
the country, and there's been an
avid listener of yours for many years.

620
00:57:59,639 --> 00:58:02,800
And yeah, and I just want
to say that I completely agree with everything

621
00:58:02,920 --> 00:58:09,320
that you said. And there are
a lot of Orthodox Christian apologetics that speak

622
00:58:09,480 --> 00:58:19,840
basically the same about this intensely physical
manifestations which kind of can be associated also

623
00:58:19,960 --> 00:58:25,440
with the top heresy of Roman Catholicism, which is the nonsinning nature of the

624
00:58:25,639 --> 00:58:30,960
pope and him having qualities of Christ, and then this kind of pouring down

625
00:58:31,079 --> 00:58:37,039
to their medieval and modern states,
especially with the texts of women claiming that

626
00:58:37,159 --> 00:58:42,599
they had this kind of physical contact
with Christ. And I don't want to

627
00:58:42,599 --> 00:58:46,000
sound plastomers as well, but it
kind of gets quite quite erotic at times

628
00:58:46,039 --> 00:58:52,400
exactly, And I just wanted to
ask you if you've read the modern Russian

629
00:58:52,559 --> 00:58:57,159
Saint Ignatious branching Ino, he has
a lot of good work specifically on these

630
00:58:57,280 --> 00:59:01,360
topics and analyzing. Yes, act, I was looking at some quotes the

631
00:59:01,440 --> 00:59:08,039
other day from him critiquing Francis of
ASSISI, but I don't remember which book

632
00:59:08,119 --> 00:59:09,760
do you do? You know,
off the top of your head, which

633
00:59:09,840 --> 00:59:15,159
book Saint Ignatius does those critiques in. I'll look, I'll look up.

634
00:59:15,239 --> 00:59:22,280
There's quite a lot of like Orthodox
saints who have quite quite texts on on

635
00:59:22,480 --> 00:59:30,159
on this specific issue of this kind
of passionate passionate understanding and kind of uh

636
00:59:30,760 --> 00:59:34,960
harris regarding this spic. To look
them up and I'll try to find the

637
00:59:35,000 --> 00:59:38,840
English version and I'll send you the
the text. Yeah, that'd be great.

638
00:59:38,920 --> 00:59:42,599
Yeah. So basically, if you
guys couldn't hear him, he's saying

639
00:59:42,679 --> 00:59:49,360
that Saint Ignatius Bernkaninov has some really
good critiques of the Tennessee in the Latin

640
00:59:49,719 --> 00:59:54,360
so called saints of the second millennium
to fall into this eroticism and this sensuality

641
00:59:54,480 --> 00:59:58,679
and all that. But yeah,
we definitely need to check those out.

642
01:00:00,360 --> 01:00:02,559
Say, I'd like to invite you
to come to pilgrimage to Georgia to see

643
01:00:02,599 --> 01:00:07,119
some of the oldest monasteries. That
would be cool. Yeah, I mean

644
01:00:07,199 --> 01:00:13,760
my priest after we did the Italy
pilgrimage, he was thinking of other places

645
01:00:14,039 --> 01:00:19,679
like like I think he mentioned maybe
even Georgia. But maybe one day appreciate

646
01:00:19,760 --> 01:00:23,719
that, Auto, I'll follow you
and then you can message me that stuff.

647
01:00:23,760 --> 01:00:30,119
Ana totally. What's up to appreciate
that? Now before we go to

648
01:00:30,239 --> 01:00:35,079
him. I did want to mention
that. So we have this story of

649
01:00:35,239 --> 01:00:39,119
the circumcision. Obviously, the circumcision
of Christ is very important in the liturgical

650
01:00:39,400 --> 01:00:50,119
cycle of the Church. But I'm
looking for that woman. That who's the

651
01:00:50,360 --> 01:01:02,960
Roman Catholic saint woman that claimed to
get the circumcision ring. Yes, here

652
01:01:04,000 --> 01:01:07,360
it is. Oh, is it
Catherine of Sienna. Oh, I didn't

653
01:01:07,360 --> 01:01:14,159
know. I thought it was somebody
else. Catherine of Sienna is a complex

654
01:01:14,239 --> 01:01:20,719
figure, many mystical visions. Of
course, By the way, isn't she

655
01:01:20,800 --> 01:01:23,880
the one who supposedly said I'll follow
the hope of it even if he's Satan.

656
01:01:27,960 --> 01:01:37,519
But she supposedly what receives the mystical
circumcision ring from the foreskin of Jesus.

657
01:01:38,239 --> 01:01:42,719
Moreover, the idea of Christ mystically
wedding Catherine with a ring of his

658
01:01:42,880 --> 01:01:46,880
foreskin. All right, so you
understand that in the Roman Catholic tradition,

659
01:01:47,079 --> 01:01:50,599
like a lot of people think,
well I can just throw this out,

660
01:01:51,599 --> 01:01:55,119
you don't actually get to throw out
these stories of these women saints and their

661
01:01:57,199 --> 01:02:06,840
oddities. Who's the woman that carved
Jesus carved into her chest? I mean

662
01:02:07,000 --> 01:02:34,440
what Margaret Mary alc coquay is that
her French Catholic mystic people in the chat?

663
01:02:34,800 --> 01:02:39,480
Is that, right, Catherine seeing
a Yeah, I know about her

664
01:02:39,559 --> 01:02:43,679
pope even if this, even if
the pope were Satan incarnate, we ought

665
01:02:43,719 --> 01:02:50,519
to not raise our heads against him. Okay, whatever. But what I'm

666
01:02:50,519 --> 01:02:52,679
getting at is like you don't get
the liberty in the Roman Catholic world to

667
01:02:52,760 --> 01:02:55,320
be like, no, I don't. I don't accept that. That's no,

668
01:02:55,480 --> 01:03:01,320
you have to accept that, like
you, the canonization of saints is

669
01:03:01,360 --> 01:03:10,000
part of the ordinary magisterium in the
Roman Caolic Church. But who is this

670
01:03:10,119 --> 01:03:16,679
the woman who has the Jesus carved
his name into her chest? Like she's

671
01:03:16,760 --> 01:03:23,119
like a high school desk or something. By the way, why is it

672
01:03:23,239 --> 01:03:29,920
that so many of these women start
to have these manifestations and visions in the

673
01:03:30,079 --> 01:03:34,599
Latin West, particularly in the fifteen
hundreds and after. Isn't that interesting?

674
01:03:35,320 --> 01:03:37,960
I mean, you do have the
medieval mystics that we talked about in the

675
01:03:37,000 --> 01:03:42,039
thirteen hundreds, fourteen hundreds, et
cetera. But it seems to really ramp

676
01:03:42,159 --> 01:03:54,480
up around this time and perhaps a
counter Reformation period. Oh is this it?

677
01:03:54,599 --> 01:03:59,719
Yeah? Here it is. Mother
Mary assented, there's some of the

678
01:03:59,760 --> 01:04:05,639
mother sent Sister Mary. Margaret implored
Mother Grafie to allow her to sign with

679
01:04:05,920 --> 01:04:11,360
blood, but the mother assented,
and Sister Margaret Mary went to her cell.

680
01:04:11,760 --> 01:04:15,880
She buried her breast, and,
imitating her illustrious and saintly foundress,

681
01:04:15,960 --> 01:04:19,000
she cut with a knife the name
of Jesus above her heart. The blood

682
01:04:19,039 --> 01:04:25,960
that flowed from the wound then was
used to sign this pact. I'm sorry,

683
01:04:26,039 --> 01:04:31,960
this has nothing to do. This
is like self harm. This is

684
01:04:32,480 --> 01:04:39,719
like ultimate prelust. Imagine believing that
this is like sanctity and piety. You

685
01:04:39,840 --> 01:04:42,760
have to believe this is Roman calauary. You understand there's not options. Oh,

686
01:04:42,800 --> 01:04:45,440
I don't believe that I'm Roman CALLI, but I don't believe that we're

687
01:04:45,519 --> 01:04:51,000
literally doing like the prophets of bail
stuff here does nobody remember the story of

688
01:04:51,519 --> 01:04:56,800
Elijah and the prophets of bail right, Elijah's making fun of them, call

689
01:04:56,880 --> 01:04:59,880
your God? Is he using the
bathroom? And they're literally over there cut

690
01:05:00,159 --> 01:05:06,320
themselves. She's over here cutting the
name of Jesus into her chest and then

691
01:05:06,599 --> 01:05:15,800
signing a pact in blood, Margaret
Mary Ala coquoit. And you don't get

692
01:05:15,800 --> 01:05:18,199
to reject this. If you're a
cat, you understand that, like you

693
01:05:18,280 --> 01:05:24,880
have to accept this. Is it
any wonder that this is how that Roman

694
01:05:24,920 --> 01:05:30,599
Catholics act so effeminate and insane and
emotional. Well, they're just mirroring and

695
01:05:30,719 --> 01:05:39,119
exemplifying their so called saints and their
histrionics. Didn't Saint Jemma throw herself down

696
01:05:39,159 --> 01:05:44,280
a well? I'm not talking about
you go get in cold water to quell

697
01:05:44,400 --> 01:05:49,280
my passions, Okay, like throwing
yourself down a well. I'm pretty sure

698
01:05:49,280 --> 01:05:55,679
that's Saint Jemma that did that,
right, Yeah, Saint Gemma Galgani.

699
01:06:01,440 --> 01:06:10,280
So does nobody see that? That's
clearly people have like they're having problems.

700
01:06:16,480 --> 01:06:21,199
Oh, by the way, Augustine, when he is critiquing and making fun

701
01:06:21,280 --> 01:06:25,559
of the Donatists, He says that
one of the things that the Donatists used

702
01:06:25,559 --> 01:06:30,800
to do was throw themselves down wells
because they felt like that would actually achieve

703
01:06:30,880 --> 01:06:33,000
martyrdom because they had this some of
the Donatis had their weird idea that you

704
01:06:33,039 --> 01:06:38,000
could only be saved if you were
a martyr, and so they felt like

705
01:06:38,239 --> 01:06:43,079
if they threw themselves down a well
to fight their passions, that was a

706
01:06:43,119 --> 01:06:47,440
form of martyrdom. I mean,
it's insane, hypocrite, sincere hypocrite.

707
01:07:00,679 --> 01:07:05,639
Hello, can you hear me?
M hi? I just wanted to ask

708
01:07:05,800 --> 01:07:12,280
like a few questions. So one
of the questions I wanted to ask I

709
01:07:13,000 --> 01:07:17,519
used to be an atheist for a
while and now inquiring into Orthodoxy. Something

710
01:07:17,599 --> 01:07:24,280
I've noticed is it seems like atheism
is a result of some Christian heresies,

711
01:07:24,800 --> 01:07:32,039
like, for example, transgenderism seems
to be a manifestation of gnosticism, and

712
01:07:32,239 --> 01:07:38,920
it seems like a lot of humanist
ideas come from Catholicism. Yeah, I've

713
01:07:39,039 --> 01:07:42,960
argued that for a long time.
I have a podcast I did eight years

714
01:07:43,000 --> 01:07:48,800
ago called Catholicism and Thomism caused Western
atheism, and Gregory Palamas says in his

715
01:07:48,920 --> 01:07:55,760
debates with the Barleamites that if you
continue in the tradition of this barleymite Roman

716
01:07:55,800 --> 01:08:00,280
Catholic position, you will eventually become
atheist. He was right. And then

717
01:08:00,400 --> 01:08:04,800
one other thing I've noticed is a
lot of atheists will say the Old Testament

718
01:08:04,920 --> 01:08:10,119
God is cruel, but the New
Testament God is good, and it's just

719
01:08:10,360 --> 01:08:15,079
strange to realize. Wait, this
sounds exactly like Marcianism. Wait, yeah,

720
01:08:15,119 --> 01:08:18,520
that is Martianism. But absolutely,
I mean a lot of the I

721
01:08:18,600 --> 01:08:24,279
did a video called the Nine nine
Ancient Heresies that are back like five or

722
01:08:24,279 --> 01:08:27,680
six years ago, and yeah,
I was arguing that a lot of the

723
01:08:27,800 --> 01:08:31,680
problems could be traced to that,
including even atheism. And yet the idea

724
01:08:31,720 --> 01:08:35,199
that you can become a woman,
etc. That transhumanist stuff is gnostic.

725
01:08:35,720 --> 01:08:43,960
Absolutely. Okay, do I have
time for one more question? Yeah,

726
01:08:43,960 --> 01:08:47,119
I just want to add to that
for those that are curious. Another example

727
01:08:47,199 --> 01:08:55,880
of this is Faustina Kowalska. She
has these accounts another Roman galic saying that

728
01:08:55,920 --> 01:08:59,479
you have to accept that the host
like floated around the room, and Jesus

729
01:08:59,520 --> 01:09:02,359
would talk her out of the floating
host and said, you're the most holy

730
01:09:02,439 --> 01:09:06,720
of all the nuns in the monastery, and I'm your boyfriend. Literally,

731
01:09:06,800 --> 01:09:11,680
I'm your boyfriend. You're my girlfriend, and you're the best and most holiest.

732
01:09:12,079 --> 01:09:15,479
Literally, the opposite of anything in
Orthodoxy about if there was any kind

733
01:09:15,479 --> 01:09:19,720
of real vision of Christ or whatever. It's the opposite. It's not oh,

734
01:09:19,800 --> 01:09:24,800
I'm the holiest of all the nuns
the monastery. It's I'm the worst

735
01:09:24,840 --> 01:09:29,199
of sinners. It's Isaiah saying,
you know, Lord, I'm not worthy.

736
01:09:29,279 --> 01:09:32,600
My tongue is filthy. Right.
When Isaiah sees the Lord in Isaiah

737
01:09:32,680 --> 01:09:36,760
six, he's humbled. Orthodox Saints
when they talk about seeing the divinelight,

738
01:09:36,800 --> 01:09:44,159
they're humbled Roman Catholic Saints. I'm
the holiest and Jesus my boyfriend. Go

739
01:09:44,199 --> 01:09:49,199
ahead. Ah. So the other
question I wanted to ask is I agree

740
01:09:49,359 --> 01:09:54,840
that the Church is visible and not
invisible. But I think something I'm struggling

741
01:09:54,920 --> 01:09:59,560
to understand is how is the Church
the literal body of Christ? Because when

742
01:09:59,720 --> 01:10:03,239
I it, Buddy, I just
think of like a human body. Yeah,

743
01:10:03,279 --> 01:10:09,640
we're mystically and we're mystically united to
Christ's physical flesh. And that's why

744
01:10:09,760 --> 01:10:14,119
in the Eucharist, as Cyril says
at Ephesis, we partake of his deified

745
01:10:14,239 --> 01:10:18,199
flesh to become part of his human
flesh. I okay, I see,

746
01:10:20,840 --> 01:10:25,119
uh that was all the questions.
Thank you very much, Yes, sir,

747
01:10:25,199 --> 01:10:56,279
Yeah, that's a great question.
I appreciate that. What's up,

748
01:10:56,359 --> 01:11:15,159
man, anatotally? Are you there? I'm trying to find the really good

749
01:11:15,399 --> 01:11:20,760
accounts of Jesus floating around in the
host in the in her convent and telling

750
01:11:20,840 --> 01:11:26,880
her that their boyfriend girlfriend. It's
so ridiculous, like you have to believe

751
01:11:26,920 --> 01:11:29,520
this as a Roman calicy, you
don't get to doubt this. Are you

752
01:11:29,560 --> 01:11:34,079
there, man? What's up?
Yeah? Okay, all right, So

753
01:11:34,119 --> 01:11:41,359
I just have a couple of questions
about signs and wonders. So the other

754
01:11:41,439 --> 01:11:45,680
day I think you talked to somebody
about how basically wonders and signs are not

755
01:11:45,800 --> 01:11:51,359
necessarily proofs of the faith. Right, So my question essentially is to what

756
01:11:51,520 --> 01:11:59,119
extent do wonders work as proving the
faith? And also, if Christ was

757
01:11:59,279 --> 01:12:04,359
in a non faith this generation,
would he like philosophically prove his gliness.

758
01:12:05,880 --> 01:12:10,319
I don't think it was anything to
do with philosophy. I think that over

759
01:12:10,359 --> 01:12:13,760
and over when he's arguing with the
Pharisees, what he says is do you

760
01:12:13,880 --> 01:12:15,760
not know the scriptures? Did you
not read the scriptures? Did you not

761
01:12:15,960 --> 01:12:20,399
know the times? And the times? Mean being aware of what the scriptures

762
01:12:20,439 --> 01:12:25,000
said? Like this is not Protestant, Like this is literally the way Jesus

763
01:12:25,079 --> 01:12:29,039
constantly argues with the Pharisees. He's
like, how do you not know what

764
01:12:29,279 --> 01:12:32,720
the scriptures were telling you about the
seasons and the times when the Messiah is

765
01:12:32,800 --> 01:12:35,920
coming? You should expect this,
this, this right, So he's kind

766
01:12:35,920 --> 01:12:41,479
of holding them liable for misunderstanding the
texts and the scriptures that they had,

767
01:12:42,159 --> 01:12:47,239
and then saying that there's signs and
wonders, but signs and wonders are for

768
01:12:47,800 --> 01:12:51,239
weak faith, not for strong faith. That's why he said. That's why

769
01:12:51,279 --> 01:12:56,640
Paul says, it's the miracles and
tongues and all that are signs to unbelievers.

770
01:12:57,159 --> 01:13:00,800
They're indicators. They're like they're like
stamps or seals, but they can't

771
01:13:00,840 --> 01:13:06,079
be proofs because again, John Ays
and John Brace did the first two miracles

772
01:13:06,159 --> 01:13:11,359
quote unquote of Moses, right,
So whether Jonayson John Brace did miracles or

773
01:13:11,439 --> 01:13:16,560
whether they were just mimicking or faking
the first two signs of Moses, the

774
01:13:16,600 --> 01:13:23,319
first two curses and signs, it
doesn't like the point is that it wouldn't

775
01:13:23,399 --> 01:13:28,880
prove it, because how does a
Roman Catholic tell them? On what basis?

776
01:13:28,960 --> 01:13:32,239
Can a Roman Catholic tell me that
the Coptic Church is wrong if Mary

777
01:13:32,319 --> 01:13:39,680
appears over the Coptic Church two thousands
of people just like at Vatima. Oh

778
01:13:39,760 --> 01:13:44,079
yeah, I mean I agree with
that one. What I have difficulty with

779
01:13:44,239 --> 01:13:47,000
is basically I never really had this
understanding of miracles. I've always heard that

780
01:13:47,000 --> 01:13:51,880
it's just that like miracles basically prove
Christianity. That maybe just because like listening

781
01:13:51,920 --> 01:13:58,039
to certain Protestant preachers and whatnot.
But my question is essentially to probably argue

782
01:13:58,079 --> 01:14:00,720
with an atheist, would you want
to if they're paradigm before getting into the

783
01:14:00,760 --> 01:14:04,760
miracles. And that's when, well, I look, yeah, because most

784
01:14:05,159 --> 01:14:09,560
atheists are just going to say I
don't believe in miracles, so you could

785
01:14:09,800 --> 01:14:13,119
you can claim miracles all day long. They're not going to care. So

786
01:14:14,039 --> 01:14:16,479
I just don't think that there's not
much mileage. I mean unless an atheist

787
01:14:17,039 --> 01:14:21,560
experiences directly a miracle, which is
possible, I'm sure that's happened. Like

788
01:14:24,239 --> 01:14:28,399
literally, no atheist is going to
care that you claim that the Roman Callolic

789
01:14:28,479 --> 01:14:31,079
Church has miracles. I mean,
maybe one of them one one day,

790
01:14:31,159 --> 01:14:35,399
might care I don't. I mean, I suppose the miracle evidential as claims,

791
01:14:36,279 --> 01:14:44,399
sometimes convert people. But you know, Jesus says to Thomas, you

792
01:14:44,479 --> 01:14:48,000
know you have seen and believed.
Blessed are those who have not seen and

793
01:14:48,119 --> 01:14:56,199
believed. So a wicked and faithless
generation seeks to sign Okay, So just

794
01:14:56,279 --> 01:15:03,079
a final question, just found clarification. So so first part, miracles essentially

795
01:15:04,119 --> 01:15:11,199
are not on their own proving of
anything, right, I know, I

796
01:15:12,159 --> 01:15:15,560
not without the context as a whole. So like, for example, somebody

797
01:15:15,680 --> 01:15:23,319
resurrecting, like if I'm if Elijah
rises from the dead, assume your Elisha's

798
01:15:23,359 --> 01:15:29,279
bones or whatever, right, Or
if Elijah raises the widow's son back to

799
01:15:29,399 --> 01:15:33,880
life, does that prove Christianity Because
a Jew might believe that, but he

800
01:15:33,920 --> 01:15:40,520
doesn't believe Christianity. So the resurrection
story really only makes sense with the context

801
01:15:40,640 --> 01:15:44,720
of the rest of the story or
the rest of the Christian redemptive message.

802
01:15:45,520 --> 01:15:50,079
So just resurrection itself doesn't even necessarily
prove anything, because it might be a

803
01:15:50,199 --> 01:15:57,000
situation like Elijah raising the widow's son, or it might be a situation like

804
01:15:57,039 --> 01:16:00,960
the bones of Elisha raising the guy
from the that in the Old Testament,

805
01:16:00,479 --> 01:16:06,439
and a Jew can affirm those things, and he doesn't believe Christianity. Okay,

806
01:16:06,800 --> 01:16:10,000
okay, I mean I agree.
I mean that makes a lot of

807
01:16:10,079 --> 01:16:15,600
sense. So I don't think in
like perfect circumstances, you know, when

808
01:16:15,640 --> 01:16:18,159
people are perfect faith. I guess
you could say, I guess it's not

809
01:16:18,279 --> 01:16:25,000
possible. But the idea is,
I guess miracles don't happen in that cases.

810
01:16:25,119 --> 01:16:28,319
Editor or miracles, Well, here's
what I think. So let's get

811
01:16:28,359 --> 01:16:32,239
the example of the guy who goes
to Abraham's buzzom, or me who goes

812
01:16:32,279 --> 01:16:40,319
to Hades, and then he sees
the righteous Lazarus, who was poor and

813
01:16:40,479 --> 01:16:43,520
had a rough time in this life, but love God. And so he

814
01:16:43,640 --> 01:16:46,720
ends up in Abraham's bosom, and
the rich man who never helped him and

815
01:16:47,439 --> 01:16:51,119
you know, scoffed at him.
Is in is in Hades, is in

816
01:16:51,359 --> 01:16:56,800
the realm of the dead, the
bad part of the realm of the dead.

817
01:16:57,520 --> 01:17:00,560
And he says, Father Abraham,
have mercy on me. Send Lazarus

818
01:17:00,600 --> 01:17:04,279
that he might dip the tip of
his finger in water and cool my tongue.

819
01:17:04,479 --> 01:17:08,760
I am tormented here. But Abraham
said, son, remember that in

820
01:17:08,840 --> 01:17:14,199
your lifetime you receive good things.
Likewise Lazarus received evil things. But now

821
01:17:14,239 --> 01:17:15,960
he is comforted, and you were
tormented. And besides all of this,

822
01:17:16,520 --> 01:17:20,479
there's a gulf between you and us
that those who want to pass from here

823
01:17:20,600 --> 01:17:24,720
to you cannot, nor can those
from you to us. Therefore, he

824
01:17:24,760 --> 01:17:27,920
said, I beg you father,
send me back, to send him to

825
01:17:28,239 --> 01:17:30,560
my father's house, where I have
five brothers, and if he can revised

826
01:17:30,560 --> 01:17:33,680
from the dead, he can testify
to them not to come to this place

827
01:17:33,720 --> 01:17:39,840
of torment. Abraham said, they
have Moses and the prophets. So in

828
01:17:39,960 --> 01:17:45,359
Jesus's mind or in Abraham's mind,
here the scriptures and their inspiration is supposed

829
01:17:45,359 --> 01:17:51,520
to be the miracle testimony, the
miracle attestation right, the Messianic prophecies,

830
01:17:51,600 --> 01:17:57,760
the stories and predictions are supposed to
be the things that would prove this story

831
01:17:57,800 --> 01:18:01,520
to be true. I see,
hold on, let me finish. They

832
01:18:01,560 --> 01:18:04,880
have Moses in the prophets, let
them hear them. But he says,

833
01:18:04,960 --> 01:18:09,840
no, Father Abraham, if one
rise from the dead, then they will

834
01:18:09,880 --> 01:18:14,000
surely repent. But Abraham said,
if they don't hear Moses, and the

835
01:18:14,039 --> 01:18:16,479
prophets. They're not going to be
persuaded though one rise from the dead.

836
01:18:19,520 --> 01:18:23,640
Okay, So okay, that makes
a lot of sense. I mean,

837
01:18:24,399 --> 01:18:28,880
so it's like the prophecy being fulfilling
in of itself is like a miraculous section

838
01:18:28,960 --> 01:18:30,520
as well. Absolutely, yeah,
I mean the inspiration, I mean the

839
01:18:30,840 --> 01:18:34,359
mess and prophecies. There are some
of the most powerful miracles out there,

840
01:18:34,399 --> 01:18:39,920
and I think that that, you
know, the whole point here is just

841
01:18:39,960 --> 01:18:45,039
simply that not that there are no
miracles, but that the true faith will

842
01:18:45,159 --> 01:18:49,279
be attended by miracles. But miracle
claims themselves don't necessarily tell us the true

843
01:18:49,319 --> 01:19:09,039
faith. That's the key pointer.
Ferg So I have two things. First

844
01:19:09,039 --> 01:19:12,399
of all, I want to walk
you through like aclesiological argument I was getting.

845
01:19:12,439 --> 01:19:15,880
And then I have a small disagreement
to go over in terms of not

846
01:19:15,079 --> 01:19:18,680
the confluence of toll houses. But
I'll start with theirclesiology. So I was

847
01:19:18,800 --> 01:19:23,840
speaking to a vicar of an Anglican
church. He was he laid forth the

848
01:19:23,960 --> 01:19:28,960
argument that all of christ Church flows
from Christ, and it's like a river,

849
01:19:29,520 --> 01:19:33,960
and even though the river splits off, it's all points to Christ.

850
01:19:34,279 --> 01:19:38,399
Right, That's what he was saying, And in my view, I think

851
01:19:38,439 --> 01:19:42,000
some of the streams would be polluted, right, But would you say it's

852
01:19:42,039 --> 01:19:45,079
fair to say that even if you
go to the polluted stream, you should

853
01:19:45,119 --> 01:19:48,640
follow upstream to find the actual church. Do you agree with that? I

854
01:19:48,720 --> 01:19:51,760
don't. I mean, is this
like an Anglican branch theory argument. I

855
01:19:51,760 --> 01:19:55,560
don't understand the argument. I think
it is branch story argument, yes,

856
01:19:55,640 --> 01:19:58,720
But I was just like wanting to
know what the best way to argue against

857
01:19:58,720 --> 01:20:00,600
it would be, because obviously could
say the Body of Christ can't be divided,

858
01:20:00,600 --> 01:20:03,600
because I think it always means on
the story and I need it does.

859
01:20:03,720 --> 01:20:08,079
And I mean does anybody in the
first thousand years and the ecumenical councils

860
01:20:08,159 --> 01:20:11,680
do they argue that the church is
a branch? No, they don't.

861
01:20:11,720 --> 01:20:14,800
But these people they don't look into
history. They go from their perspective and

862
01:20:14,920 --> 01:20:17,600
try and make things fit what they
want. But like I kind of well,

863
01:20:17,600 --> 01:20:21,399
I mean then I would immediately say
that that if you're not interested in

864
01:20:21,560 --> 01:20:27,039
being united with the Church of History, then like then you're not the Church

865
01:20:27,119 --> 01:20:30,279
of history. Like but they just
a delusional they don't know what the Church

866
01:20:30,319 --> 01:20:32,800
of History is. That just think
like everyone like their view of what a

867
01:20:32,880 --> 01:20:38,000
Christian is as anyone who believes in
Christ as a Christian, that makest I

868
01:20:38,079 --> 01:20:40,600
mean individual. I mean I don't
know what to say to that. Like,

869
01:20:41,039 --> 01:20:44,720
obviously that's not true either, because
Mormons claim to be Christians, are

870
01:20:44,760 --> 01:20:46,239
just claiming to be a Christian.
Obviously can't be the thing that makes you

871
01:20:46,399 --> 01:20:50,079
really Christian, right, Yeah,
but you don't think that, like in

872
01:20:50,199 --> 01:20:55,640
someone's high if they love Christ like
which is like marcuss that actually love God,

873
01:20:55,720 --> 01:20:57,960
like that's insane, how to do
it? Like, you don't think

874
01:20:58,000 --> 01:21:00,960
that they would also qualify them as
a Christian. I mean, are you

875
01:21:00,000 --> 01:21:02,880
saying that a Mormon can do that? Well, no, you don't know

876
01:21:02,920 --> 01:21:05,960
if the Mormon loves God. But
if the moments, like a kid who's

877
01:21:06,000 --> 01:21:11,399
raised in it and he like just
like loves God, I mean that's still

878
01:21:11,520 --> 01:21:15,479
not that's not saying that you can
be like a Mormon and be saved.

879
01:21:15,640 --> 01:21:20,640
That would be God saving and revealing
to those people in some extra normantive way

880
01:21:20,760 --> 01:21:25,359
who he really is. That's possible. God can do that, But no,

881
01:21:25,880 --> 01:21:29,520
that makes sense, that's not it's
not Mormonism as the vehicle for that.

882
01:21:30,279 --> 01:21:33,279
Yeah. But yeah, even if
it's like polluted though it's kind of

883
01:21:33,319 --> 01:21:39,399
still as in a sense. But
anyway, I'll move on to the toll

884
01:21:39,479 --> 01:21:41,960
houses, Like, what's your view
on that, because I think it's like

885
01:21:42,039 --> 01:21:46,359
a this like the like Seraph and
Rose and stuff. He says, it's

886
01:21:46,399 --> 01:21:50,000
like a dog kind of like tradition
of the church that's been handed down and

887
01:21:50,279 --> 01:21:54,199
it's like we should believe in it. But I would say that it's a

888
01:21:54,560 --> 01:22:00,680
like most it's a theologuminon and a
wors It's it's just oh I view,

889
01:22:00,840 --> 01:22:04,520
so I think it's a it's a
liturgical tradition, uh, and it's in

890
01:22:05,119 --> 01:22:10,039
the mystical writings of the church and
in some of the spiritual writings of the

891
01:22:10,159 --> 01:22:14,439
church. I think that it is. It does verge on being dangerous if

892
01:22:14,479 --> 01:22:18,439
we read everything about it very literally. A lot of those stories of saints

893
01:22:18,479 --> 01:22:24,640
and things like that are not necessarily
canonical dogma. So I do think there

894
01:22:24,760 --> 01:22:28,479
is a journey of the soul.
I do think there are there is a

895
01:22:28,560 --> 01:22:31,239
toll house thing going on, but
I don't think we know like the details

896
01:22:31,319 --> 01:22:35,239
of the intermediate state. So there. I just don't think everything about it

897
01:22:35,319 --> 01:22:39,800
is like a literal thing that you
know, you can chart out like some

898
01:22:39,920 --> 01:22:43,880
sort of role playing game or something
like that. Yeah, sure, it's

899
01:22:43,920 --> 01:22:47,239
really good analysis. I saw by
Orthodox Phraise, I think, and it

900
01:22:47,399 --> 01:22:51,880
was there was a much longer chronicle
by some like great Orthodox monks. I

901
01:22:51,880 --> 01:22:55,119
think it was like not in your
pages. I'm pretty sure you have that.

902
01:22:55,399 --> 01:22:58,720
I do. I have. I
have the surprom Rose book and I

903
01:22:58,800 --> 01:23:01,600
have the Monastery book on Yeah,
well this if you can, I could

904
01:23:01,640 --> 01:23:04,239
try to get you ask this,
but it's like it's like fifteen pages or

905
01:23:04,279 --> 01:23:08,960
something. That's really good analysis of
it. And he was like, and

906
01:23:09,279 --> 01:23:12,239
there, for example, you're talking
about a Greek Orthodox or is it a

907
01:23:12,279 --> 01:23:15,760
Greek Orthodox? Response and critique of
it, I'm not sure who, Like,

908
01:23:16,039 --> 01:23:18,640
I just know it was an Orthodox
father. It was criticular. I

909
01:23:18,720 --> 01:23:20,600
think I've read it. I'm familiar
with it. Yeah, I mean I

910
01:23:21,039 --> 01:23:25,079
did. I went through all of
this. This is I'm not faulting you,

911
01:23:25,279 --> 01:23:28,520
but like it's kind of a thing
that a lot of people go through

912
01:23:28,560 --> 01:23:30,439
when you first come into Orthodoxy and
then they kind of struggle with this.

913
01:23:31,000 --> 01:23:34,479
But it's it's something that I don't
have moved past a long time ago.

914
01:23:34,640 --> 01:23:43,399
But I'm not faulting you. I
understand. I just don't think it's it's

915
01:23:43,399 --> 01:23:47,760
strict dogmatic issue that we have to
worry about. I mean, I do

916
01:23:47,840 --> 01:23:51,079
think that there are toolhouses, but
I'm saying that it can be a little

917
01:23:51,359 --> 01:24:06,079
much. You there, what's up, dude? Hey, Jay, I

918
01:24:06,159 --> 01:24:13,680
just had a quick question or actually
just a quick comment too earlier when you

919
01:24:13,760 --> 01:24:17,399
were talking about, like when those
guys were talking about some of the things

920
01:24:17,439 --> 01:24:24,239
like Faustina. Yeah, I definitely
think that too. A side note with

921
01:24:24,439 --> 01:24:29,000
that, especially that makes that one
more specifically even harder to deal with is

922
01:24:29,039 --> 01:24:32,640
the fact that it's very promulgated in
Catholicism. Oh that's a great point.

923
01:24:32,720 --> 01:24:36,159
Yeah, it's not like this is
an obscure thing. The divine is a

924
01:24:36,279 --> 01:24:41,359
divine mercy, right, yeah,
the divine mercy. I actually live like

925
01:24:41,800 --> 01:24:45,760
forty minutes from the shrine, the
National Shrine. Oh and it's uh yeah,

926
01:24:45,960 --> 01:24:50,000
it's it's right in Massachusetts. The
Uh yeah, it's. But either

927
01:24:50,000 --> 01:24:54,039
way, it's very promulgated the divine
mercy. I mean, could possibly even

928
01:24:54,399 --> 01:24:58,119
I mean, I don't know,
I'm probably exaggerating this, but maybe even

929
01:24:58,199 --> 01:25:01,600
like takeover things like the rosary eventually. Really, it's that it's that big.

930
01:25:01,680 --> 01:25:06,880
Yeah, even liturgically too, if
you if you've ever attended any masses,

931
01:25:06,920 --> 01:25:09,840
which obviously you have, but I'm
not sure if you came across it

932
01:25:10,199 --> 01:25:12,039
in your time. No, I
remember, Like I mean, a lot

933
01:25:12,119 --> 01:25:15,399
of parishes just in general will have
the painting of Jesus with the rays coming

934
01:25:15,439 --> 01:25:21,319
out. Yeah, I mean that's
everywhere, But I don't remember if I

935
01:25:21,399 --> 01:25:25,640
ever did. I might have actually
done the Divine Mercy chaplet at one point

936
01:25:26,479 --> 01:25:30,560
probably. Yeah, like I said, it's definitely very promulgated. The uh

937
01:25:30,880 --> 01:25:31,920
another cook side note cook for that. I't want to take up too much

938
01:25:31,960 --> 01:25:38,239
your time, but the uh,
it's really fine because guys like the you

939
01:25:38,319 --> 01:25:42,960
know, the Diamond Brothers even like
are against that, and even too if

940
01:25:42,960 --> 01:25:45,079
you go back to like the early
twentieth century, obviously it wasn't even like

941
01:25:46,000 --> 01:25:49,279
it hasn't been promulgated for forever.
Obviously there was a lot of blacklash against

942
01:25:49,319 --> 01:25:53,760
it, right, I think I
changed too, And yeah, I was

943
01:25:53,840 --> 01:25:56,319
just I was looking up like the
hosts that you were talking about, because

944
01:25:56,319 --> 01:25:59,000
I recall hearing it, and yeah, it's just it's it's bizarre, it's

945
01:25:59,039 --> 01:26:01,800
bizarre. But yeah, here's that
painting. Of the rays coming out of

946
01:26:01,880 --> 01:26:06,239
Jesus heart. Is this I don't
even remember, but is this connected to

947
01:26:06,279 --> 01:26:13,439
sacred heart? The divine mercy,
sacred Heart of Jesus? Okay, well,

948
01:26:13,520 --> 01:26:18,159
remember sacred Heart is also a Nestorian. That's it's totally heterodox. Yeah,

949
01:26:18,199 --> 01:26:21,239
they say it in the chaplain as
well, I think, I mean

950
01:26:21,239 --> 01:26:25,520
there's so many I think there's like
numerous yes to even say the chaplain now,

951
01:26:25,600 --> 01:26:29,479
so who knows, But yeah,
I've definitely seen it. I've seen

952
01:26:29,520 --> 01:26:33,399
it liturgically used. But yeah,
just bizarre, definitely with like the uh

953
01:26:34,640 --> 01:26:40,439
I'm Christ's girlfriend and weird ship with
that. But yeah, So I have

954
01:26:40,479 --> 01:26:46,760
a quick question about I've been as
I'm delving into some different things with original

955
01:26:46,840 --> 01:26:55,119
sin on the Catholic side and ancestral
sin on the Orthodox side. Uh,

956
01:26:55,439 --> 01:27:00,479
you know, it seems like there
is a genuine difference just to different sources

957
01:27:00,520 --> 01:27:03,239
I've looked through. I sometimes have
a hard time coming to know the actual

958
01:27:03,319 --> 01:27:06,920
difference because I've heard it explained maybe
not well from either side, but the

959
01:27:08,039 --> 01:27:13,199
Orthodox side that it can it could
be semantics. No, I did a

960
01:27:13,239 --> 01:27:17,439
whole three hour talk on this topic. So it's called a risk Augustine Calvin

961
01:27:17,479 --> 01:27:21,600
and original sin and ancestral sin.
Okay, I'll have to, I'll have

962
01:27:21,680 --> 01:27:25,640
to take a look at on the
channel it is. Yeah, okay,

963
01:27:26,000 --> 01:27:28,880
yeah, just because I'm struggling with
that a little bit. Okay, Yeah,

964
01:27:28,880 --> 01:27:30,760
I mean I've been there, and
I understand. I used to be

965
01:27:30,840 --> 01:27:33,479
of Augustinian. I took Augustine when
I was a Roman Catholic as my saint.

966
01:27:33,600 --> 01:27:39,760
So I mean the main issue is
just that. The main issue is

967
01:27:39,800 --> 01:27:43,800
that at the in the Augustinian idea, everyone is in atom as in an

968
01:27:43,920 --> 01:27:47,880
archetype, and everyone is guilty because
they are in atom as an archetype.

969
01:27:48,239 --> 01:27:56,199
So the classic Augustinian position is inherited
guilt. Eventually, the Roman Catholic Church

970
01:27:56,800 --> 01:28:01,159
softens its position not just with infant
limba, but also with the rejection of

971
01:28:01,199 --> 01:28:06,159
the idea of original guilt. So
this is about after gree Gregory the Great.

972
01:28:08,199 --> 01:28:13,159
After that time period, the Augustinian
idea of inherited guilts tends to die

973
01:28:13,199 --> 01:28:16,359
away. Adventure of the Romancalloy Church
rejects it. The Orthodox Church never believed

974
01:28:16,359 --> 01:28:21,560
in original guilt. Guilt is only
something that's had by the individual hypostasis uh

975
01:28:21,920 --> 01:28:27,640
using his will so that there's literally
no sense in which you could be guilty

976
01:28:28,239 --> 01:28:32,640
by nature. And so the only
people in the world who believe in inherited

977
01:28:32,680 --> 01:28:41,039
guilt still are some can Calvinists and
Lutherans. That's it. Okay. So

978
01:28:41,119 --> 01:28:43,479
then with that said, like I
don't take up too much morey time,

979
01:28:43,520 --> 01:28:48,960
But in the modern Catholic view,
would like you said, obviously there's been

980
01:28:48,960 --> 01:28:53,039
a little bit of a change or
at least how they've you know, propagated

981
01:28:53,079 --> 01:28:56,439
the modern view of it. It's
not just the modern view. It's in

982
01:28:56,520 --> 01:29:02,159
the Middle Ages that the Latin Church
rejects the idea of inherited guilt. Okay,

983
01:29:02,359 --> 01:29:09,880
So Augustine believes in the mass damnata, the damned mass, that everybody

984
01:29:10,000 --> 01:29:13,800
is a giant ball of damnation.
In Adam, it's called the mass Damnata.

985
01:29:15,399 --> 01:29:18,479
The Roman Catholic Church eventually even softens
that position in the Middle Ages to

986
01:29:18,560 --> 01:29:24,520
say that we don't even believe in
every position of Augustine. Like the idea

987
01:29:24,800 --> 01:29:30,319
of original guilt, guilt is only
something that the individual can accrue by their

988
01:29:30,359 --> 01:29:33,000
own personal will and decision and choice. It is not something that can be

989
01:29:33,319 --> 01:29:40,640
collectively handed down. The effects of
Adam Sin both Orthodox and Catholics agree come

990
01:29:40,800 --> 01:29:47,319
upon everyone, but the original guilt
does not come upon individuals until they themselves

991
01:29:47,520 --> 01:29:53,600
commit actual sins. So you might
think, well, does that mean everybody

992
01:29:53,680 --> 01:29:57,960
save No, there is still the
deprivation of grace, which is one of

993
01:29:58,039 --> 01:30:01,960
those effects of Adam sin, and
we Orthodox and Roman Catholicus agree on that.

994
01:30:03,199 --> 01:30:05,920
Awesome, all right, thank you. I'll take a quick gander at

995
01:30:05,920 --> 01:30:11,760
the video. If you could give
like a quick obviously taking everything like what

996
01:30:11,920 --> 01:30:15,399
you just said, but like a
very simple then if you take both modern

997
01:30:15,479 --> 01:30:18,960
views from both sides, what is
the biggest difference now, then that still

998
01:30:19,039 --> 01:30:24,760
separates them. I think that the
Roman cality view is still bound up with

999
01:30:25,000 --> 01:30:30,880
an Augustinian tendency towards thinking that sin
is somehow a taint or something that has

1000
01:30:30,960 --> 01:30:36,680
passed on in some substantial metaphysical way, even though they officially don't believe it.

1001
01:30:38,319 --> 01:30:42,239
This is partly why throughout the Middle
Ages, because again of the especially

1002
01:30:42,239 --> 01:30:45,479
the early Middle Ages, the dominance
of the Augustinian perspective. You have this

1003
01:30:45,680 --> 01:30:49,359
very negative view of the body,
this very negativeview of sexuality. Augustine says,

1004
01:30:49,600 --> 01:30:55,000
for example, in the City of
God that he doesn't understand how at

1005
01:30:55,039 --> 01:31:01,840
all you could be without sin in
the marital beds. Every marital relationship necessarily

1006
01:31:02,520 --> 01:31:08,399
requires and will have sin. And
that's because of his dialectical view of willing.

1007
01:31:08,479 --> 01:31:11,880
He thinks that the will is either
focused on God, it's either enraptured

1008
01:31:11,920 --> 01:31:15,560
in the one, or it's focused
on the multiplicity of creatures. So he

1009
01:31:15,600 --> 01:31:19,520
has a dialectical neoplatonic idea of willing. And so if your desire is enraptured

1010
01:31:19,560 --> 01:31:24,359
with your wife, you are necessarily
sinning. I think that it is still

1011
01:31:24,359 --> 01:31:30,079
a holdover of his Manichean days and
his tainted philosophy of neoplatonism. That view

1012
01:31:30,439 --> 01:31:35,039
is very dominant throughout the Middle Ages, and it's probably why, as we

1013
01:31:35,119 --> 01:31:40,319
were probating out the beginning of this
discussion, many of the Roman Catholic medieval

1014
01:31:40,439 --> 01:31:45,680
women saints had this negative view of
the body and sexuality. Gotcha, Then

1015
01:31:45,880 --> 01:31:53,039
I guess quickly that that would tie
into with like things like the immaculate conception.

1016
01:31:53,199 --> 01:31:56,880
Though absolutely yeah, the immaculate conception
really only makes sense if you have

1017
01:31:56,920 --> 01:32:03,039
an august Sinian anthropology correct creates an
actual obstacle then for fort modern Catholic theology,

1018
01:32:03,119 --> 01:32:06,319
because if they're trying to or have
tried to move away from the idea

1019
01:32:06,359 --> 01:32:12,439
of inherited gil while still promulgating more
very recently, promulgating the imaginlate conception.

1020
01:32:13,960 --> 01:32:17,000
That's just like a ball of absolutely, yeah, you're nailing you. That's

1021
01:32:17,079 --> 01:32:19,960
exactly and in fact, in fact, I think I make that point in

1022
01:32:20,119 --> 01:32:24,079
the three hour talk on this.
Yeah, all right, cool, I'm

1023
01:32:24,079 --> 01:32:27,359
gonna go watch that video. Thanks
for your time. Yeah, I got

1024
01:32:27,479 --> 01:32:30,119
it pulled up right here. It's
called Augustin Calvin original Sin in Orthodox theology.

1025
01:32:30,199 --> 01:32:34,319
I appreciate that. Great questions.
I love it when when people are

1026
01:32:34,359 --> 01:32:36,920
starting it's starting to click, and
you could you could tell it's starting to

1027
01:32:36,960 --> 01:32:45,720
click there other bruh. Now it's
about time for the Thomas guy. And

1028
01:32:45,840 --> 01:32:50,720
so if this smack talking Thomas guy
actually is going to show up, it's

1029
01:32:50,760 --> 01:32:55,079
going to be a separate room.
So everybody who's listening in this chat over

1030
01:32:55,159 --> 01:32:59,319
here on Twitter space, uh,
go over to the wall. I'll get

1031
01:32:59,359 --> 01:33:01,560
a check and see if he's replied
yet. And my Twitter wall, and

1032
01:33:01,640 --> 01:33:11,000
you'll see the other room that I've
created, the other space called Tomism debate.

1033
01:33:11,079 --> 01:33:16,760
What did I call it? Tumism
epistemology and Catholicism debate. So he's

1034
01:33:16,760 --> 01:33:20,079
supposed to be coming right around now. He says he wasn't sure when he

1035
01:33:20,119 --> 01:33:24,800
would get to his destination, but
let me check the DMS and see if

1036
01:33:24,800 --> 01:33:30,079
he's here yet. So I just
reshared it. It's at the top.

1037
01:33:30,880 --> 01:33:33,479
I'm gonna wait until he messages me
before I hop over to that other Twitter

1038
01:33:33,560 --> 01:33:42,119
space. He hasn't replied yet,
so let's see. I'm gonna ask him,

1039
01:33:42,159 --> 01:33:46,159
are you around yet? Bro?
And let's see what he says.

1040
01:33:47,000 --> 01:33:49,399
We'll check back in a couple of
minutes to see if he's there. What's

1041
01:33:49,479 --> 01:33:56,600
up? Other Brah? Hey,
it's me back again. Who are you?

1042
01:33:56,680 --> 01:34:00,560
I don't remember you were laughing at
yesterday? I'm the Miracles guy,

1043
01:34:03,119 --> 01:34:06,439
okay? Or no, you were
mimicking my voice, which my voice is

1044
01:34:06,479 --> 01:34:11,279
funny when I go. But anyways, well, I appreciate that you're a

1045
01:34:11,319 --> 01:34:15,000
good natured about it and we can
joke and laugh about Yeah. No,

1046
01:34:15,159 --> 01:34:21,760
I thought it was hilarious genuinely.
But anyways, I wanted to come back

1047
01:34:21,840 --> 01:34:25,479
and could. I wasn't going to, but that other guy brought it up,

1048
01:34:25,560 --> 01:34:29,520
and I think that we might agree
more than I initially thought I just

1049
01:34:29,600 --> 01:34:32,439
kind of had an instinct reaction from
when you asside Deuteronomy. It confused me,

1050
01:34:33,439 --> 01:34:36,119
but I just wanted to get well, can I restate what I said

1051
01:34:36,159 --> 01:34:43,800
to the guy a few minutes ago. I believe that miracles will necessarily attend

1052
01:34:43,840 --> 01:34:48,479
to the true faith, but I
don't think miracles in themselves can necessarily prove

1053
01:34:48,600 --> 01:34:54,319
the true faith, because a miracle
is an isolated, single event, and

1054
01:34:54,600 --> 01:35:00,560
for example, a resurrection like the
resurrection of Christ, has the meaning that

1055
01:35:00,680 --> 01:35:04,199
it has in the context of Christianity
as a whole. So like if I

1056
01:35:04,319 --> 01:35:08,039
went to let's say, I'm talking
to a Jewish guy and I say,

1057
01:35:08,720 --> 01:35:13,600
hey, look, here's a bunch
of evidences of people around Jesus that believed

1058
01:35:13,640 --> 01:35:15,640
he was resurrected, and they said
he was resurrected, and he was resurrected.

1059
01:35:16,000 --> 01:35:18,239
And the Jewish guy says, ah, yes, well, you know

1060
01:35:18,520 --> 01:35:25,439
I believe that also there were people
in the Old Testament resurrected. Therefore,

1061
01:35:25,560 --> 01:35:29,520
I believe in Judaism. You see
him the point here, like he was

1062
01:35:29,560 --> 01:35:31,960
gonna he's gonna say, yeah,
the the you know, Elijah raised the

1063
01:35:32,760 --> 01:35:39,279
widow's son exactly. So Judaism is
true. In other words, it only

1064
01:35:39,359 --> 01:35:43,880
has the meaning it's supposed to have
in the context of the Christian story of

1065
01:35:44,600 --> 01:35:49,600
the meaning of christ resurrection. You
see, right, I just uh so,

1066
01:35:49,880 --> 01:35:54,319
so I guess for me, what
I keep. What I see when

1067
01:35:54,359 --> 01:35:59,760
I read the Gospels is that Jesus
and often the Jews are in you know,

1068
01:36:00,000 --> 01:36:01,840
you were talking about someone's he's a
sign and they don't really believe in

1069
01:36:01,960 --> 01:36:05,079
And that is a problem in the
Gospel of John, like they follow him

1070
01:36:05,079 --> 01:36:08,640
because of the miracles, but they
don't they don't actually believe in it.

1071
01:36:09,319 --> 01:36:14,640
All right, So I understand that, but I do see this response where

1072
01:36:15,359 --> 01:36:17,720
you know, like an it kind
of in John ten. It really comes

1073
01:36:17,760 --> 01:36:21,439
out in verse nineteen. You have
these people, these Jews, that are

1074
01:36:21,479 --> 01:36:27,359
divided, and let me go,
let's let me pull it up. Yeah.

1075
01:36:28,319 --> 01:36:30,279
Now remember before I don't know if
you were here, but we we

1076
01:36:30,600 --> 01:36:38,520
just read the passage that I mentioned
to you right about Uh this is hold

1077
01:36:38,560 --> 01:36:43,840
on, this is the wrong here
it is. Abraham said to him,

1078
01:36:43,880 --> 01:36:46,920
they have Moses in the prophets,
let them hear them. Then the man

1079
01:36:46,960 --> 01:36:49,680
in torment said, no, Father
Abraham, if one goes to them from

1080
01:36:49,760 --> 01:36:54,039
the dead, they will surely repent. Abraham said to him, if they

1081
01:36:54,119 --> 01:36:58,760
do not hear Moses in the prophets, notice that's the pattern of the the

1082
01:36:59,720 --> 01:37:02,199
tech jewel miracles. And I could
argue, I would say, yeah,

1083
01:37:02,199 --> 01:37:04,960
I think the Messianic prophecies if you
want to say they're kind of miracle,

1084
01:37:05,000 --> 01:37:10,880
okay, I'll grant you that.
That what I see Jesus arguing here in

1085
01:37:10,960 --> 01:37:15,359
this, in this Luke sixteen passage, is if you want to talk about

1086
01:37:15,439 --> 01:37:19,960
miracles, the inspiration of the scriptures
and the Messianic prophecies are the miracles that

1087
01:37:20,079 --> 01:37:26,119
people should look to if they're if
they're interested in believing, because the signs

1088
01:37:26,159 --> 01:37:30,720
and wonders and themselves they're not necessarily
going to work. Do you see what

1089
01:37:30,760 --> 01:37:34,199
I'm saying? I think that they
it gives it. I mean, I

1090
01:37:34,239 --> 01:37:39,239
guess Peter calls it a more sure
word of prophecy because he says we were

1091
01:37:39,239 --> 01:37:45,199
eyewitnesses to Well, what does Jesus
say to doubting Thomas? Right, do

1092
01:37:45,319 --> 01:37:48,720
you believe? Blessed are those who
have not seen and yet believe after you've

1093
01:37:48,760 --> 01:37:50,840
seen? In other words, you've
seen all these miracles and you believe.

1094
01:37:50,880 --> 01:37:54,239
But blessed are those who have not
seen all these miracles and yet believe.

1095
01:37:55,760 --> 01:37:59,000
Yeah, certainly, I think that. So in those areas, yeah,

1096
01:37:59,039 --> 01:38:05,479
I do. I see the point
you're making. But going to John ten,

1097
01:38:05,640 --> 01:38:10,640
I guess it's not my concerns.
Isn't so much that something counts in

1098
01:38:10,720 --> 01:38:14,560
it self as sufficient proof. But
it's like these different points culminate and it

1099
01:38:14,640 --> 01:38:23,399
seems like the miracles end up becoming
the big sign where the viewer becomes especially

1100
01:38:23,520 --> 01:38:27,760
culpable for still rejecting it because of
something they did see. Right now,

1101
01:38:27,800 --> 01:38:30,359
Oh, I agree with that.
I think that the more, yeah,

1102
01:38:30,479 --> 01:38:32,520
the more that you see, the
more that that's the principle that he's saying

1103
01:38:32,600 --> 01:38:35,600
to doubting Thomas. Right, he's
saying, Okay, yeah, I mean

1104
01:38:35,680 --> 01:38:40,159
you believed, but you also have
been with me and seen all these miracles.

1105
01:38:40,239 --> 01:38:43,680
So like, so that's the same
principle as what you're saying or now,

1106
01:38:43,720 --> 01:38:54,279
which which verses the ten what ten? Starting in nineteen? Okay,

1107
01:38:54,359 --> 01:39:01,760
go ahead, I'm listening. So
there's a vision with the Jews because of

1108
01:39:01,800 --> 01:39:04,720
what Jesus is teaching, and some
are saying he is a demon why listening

1109
01:39:04,760 --> 01:39:09,119
to him? And others are saying
because of signs he previously did in the

1110
01:39:09,199 --> 01:39:13,720
preceding chapter, can a demon open
the eyes of the blind? And then

1111
01:39:14,439 --> 01:39:17,880
the Jews come and ask him in
the following verses if he's the Christ,

1112
01:39:18,479 --> 01:39:21,720
and he says in twenty five,
I told you, and you do not

1113
01:39:21,840 --> 01:39:26,039
believe the works that I do in
my father's name. They bear witness of

1114
01:39:26,119 --> 01:39:29,199
me, but you do not believe
because you do not belong to my sheep.

1115
01:39:29,920 --> 01:39:32,720
And he goes on to talk about
my sheep or my voice. Then

1116
01:39:33,039 --> 01:39:36,479
he goes on to say I and
my Father are one in verse thirty and

1117
01:39:36,560 --> 01:39:41,079
the Jews get ready to stone him, and again he says, I've shown

1118
01:39:41,119 --> 01:39:44,159
you many good works from the Father. For which of these do you stone

1119
01:39:44,239 --> 01:39:49,600
me? And they say it's for
blasphemy, not for good works. And

1120
01:39:49,680 --> 01:39:53,359
then going down to verse thirty seven, I'm just kind of jumping around.

1121
01:39:53,760 --> 01:39:56,800
I encourage people to go back and
read the whole thing. Jesus says,

1122
01:39:56,800 --> 01:39:59,199
if I am not doing the works
of my Father, then do not believe

1123
01:39:59,239 --> 01:40:00,800
me. But if I do them, even though you do not believe me,

1124
01:40:00,920 --> 01:40:04,520
believe the works that you may know
and understand that the Father is in

1125
01:40:04,720 --> 01:40:09,239
me and I am in the Father. Now there's a I can sort of

1126
01:40:09,600 --> 01:40:14,439
understand being a Jew viewing this,
especially in light of Deuteronomy, like they

1127
01:40:14,560 --> 01:40:16,760
see these signs, but then he's
saying, I am the Father, are

1128
01:40:16,840 --> 01:40:20,560
one, and to them it does
sound like blasphemy, and it seems like

1129
01:40:20,720 --> 01:40:27,640
Jesus is saying that these signs should
override that instinct. No, I think

1130
01:40:27,680 --> 01:40:32,479
you're saying that the opposite in thirty
eight. If you don't believe me and

1131
01:40:32,600 --> 01:40:36,800
the testimony and the things that I've
said, then then by extension, you

1132
01:40:36,880 --> 01:40:41,680
should also look at the works.
Do the works not also prove that my

1133
01:40:41,800 --> 01:40:44,760
message is true? Again, the
same principle that he said to Thomas,

1134
01:40:45,439 --> 01:40:47,520
well you believe, but you've been
with me this whole time. But it's

1135
01:40:47,600 --> 01:40:53,199
even more faithful if you believe without
the signs and wonders. And so he's

1136
01:40:53,199 --> 01:40:57,880
saying to the Pharisees the same principle
that well, I'm right here in front

1137
01:40:57,880 --> 01:41:00,520
of you, showing you and arguing
with you that I fulfilled these passages and

1138
01:41:00,680 --> 01:41:03,600
fulfill these texts. Because if you
remember, this is John ten, he

1139
01:41:03,720 --> 01:41:09,399
had just made the argument in John
eight and nine that he's the one that's

1140
01:41:09,439 --> 01:41:12,800
the fulfillment of them, of everything. Moses wrote about he's the one that

1141
01:41:12,920 --> 01:41:15,119
was talking to Abraham, right,
so he's he's this is not out of

1142
01:41:15,199 --> 01:41:19,520
nowhere. It's not like he's beginning
with just signs and wonders. He's doing

1143
01:41:20,119 --> 01:41:24,199
signs and wonders and saying, but
look, did I not try to argue

1144
01:41:24,279 --> 01:41:28,239
with you that I was the guy
in the Old Testament in all these passages

1145
01:41:28,239 --> 01:41:31,000
and all these texts, so that
again, I think the miracles are secondary

1146
01:41:31,079 --> 01:41:38,279
or tertiary. They're signs and wonders
that show yes. But let me bring

1147
01:41:38,359 --> 01:41:40,880
it back home to I think what
you're missing and what you missed in the

1148
01:41:40,920 --> 01:41:45,720
discussion the other night, which is
that even if I granted you your position

1149
01:41:45,800 --> 01:41:49,359
in this passage, what's being missed
is me, as an individual or you

1150
01:41:49,399 --> 01:41:55,840
as an individual, you can't go
and investigate firsthand all of these claims.

1151
01:41:56,479 --> 01:42:00,479
So you're not actually in any better
position as an individual, even if I

1152
01:42:00,560 --> 01:42:04,439
granted to you this passage or whatever. And you're reading like, don't you

1153
01:42:04,479 --> 01:42:12,840
understand that it's a more fundamental epistemic
issue of but look, how could miracle

1154
01:42:13,079 --> 01:42:17,680
claims be a thing that necessarily proves
it? When there are a myriad of

1155
01:42:17,760 --> 01:42:21,680
miracle claims from all over the place, and I understand your response is just

1156
01:42:21,840 --> 01:42:27,920
then say, well, but not
all of those count, and here's this,

1157
01:42:28,159 --> 01:42:30,560
this, this, this, and
this that makes it the true miracle.

1158
01:42:30,119 --> 01:42:34,039
The point is that that becomes that's
a begging the question, arbitrary move

1159
01:42:34,199 --> 01:42:40,199
to where when there's a problem to
the position about miracles being the thing that

1160
01:42:40,239 --> 01:42:43,880
shows the true of the false faith, then you qualify it and say,

1161
01:42:44,119 --> 01:42:47,119
well, those miracles over there don't
count, and it's my miracles that are

1162
01:42:47,119 --> 01:42:50,359
the ones that prove it. That's
begging the question. You understand how that's

1163
01:42:50,399 --> 01:42:56,239
the problem. I understand that.
Yeah, it seems circular, right,

1164
01:42:57,319 --> 01:43:01,199
because it seems like I kind of
am finding what works for Catholicism, yes,

1165
01:43:01,279 --> 01:43:05,840
and reasoning backwards, saying but you're
basically saying, well, it's only

1166
01:43:05,880 --> 01:43:10,439
the Catholic miracles that count, and
that's what proves Catholicism. But Catholicism is

1167
01:43:10,479 --> 01:43:12,800
the thing of the same question,
and miracles a supposed to prove it,

1168
01:43:13,880 --> 01:43:15,960
right. I guess the reason that
that's that may be clear to other people

1169
01:43:16,039 --> 01:43:19,039
that I'm doing that. The reason
it doesn't feel that way to me is

1170
01:43:19,079 --> 01:43:26,119
because I experienced it, Like I
came to this conclusion reasoning as a Protestant,

1171
01:43:26,159 --> 01:43:30,520
and I get and my reasoning was
and I guess the reason that the

1172
01:43:30,600 --> 01:43:35,560
Catholic miracles particularly impressed me is because
of the fact that I had a fixation

1173
01:43:36,199 --> 01:43:42,399
as a child on you know,
warning passages in scripture. So the blasphemy

1174
01:43:42,439 --> 01:43:45,560
of the Holy Spirit was very interesting
to me when I was young, and

1175
01:43:46,600 --> 01:43:51,880
I studied it a lot, and
it seems very clear again, like it

1176
01:43:53,039 --> 01:43:58,119
seems that there's something special to Jesus
about Hey, Jamie, would you bring

1177
01:43:58,199 --> 01:44:00,760
me a double shoff the type of
work he's doing for one, Like here

1178
01:44:00,800 --> 01:44:04,039
he keeps saying good works. Yeah, I agree with all that, But

1179
01:44:04,199 --> 01:44:08,640
how does that prove Catholicism? I
mean, why why could I not,

1180
01:44:08,720 --> 01:44:12,359
as an Orthodox person say the exact
same thing that you just said and say,

1181
01:44:12,800 --> 01:44:17,239
yes, the works that Jesus did
is doing are stupendous and far exceed

1182
01:44:17,439 --> 01:44:20,399
the works of any of the prophets
in the Old Testament like Elijah whoever.

1183
01:44:21,239 --> 01:44:28,079
And therefore Orthodoxy, well, I
suppose that, I mean, we would

1184
01:44:28,119 --> 01:44:32,399
have to start I guess I'm just
laying out a principle, and we would

1185
01:44:32,600 --> 01:44:35,359
have to go into each you know
claim, and obviously we don't, I

1186
01:44:35,399 --> 01:44:39,439
guess, okay, But see that's
the point though. So if now when

1187
01:44:39,479 --> 01:44:45,319
we actually drill into it, the
proof of Catholics as miracles require empirical investigation

1188
01:44:45,520 --> 01:44:48,760
of every single Roman Catholic miracle claim, like, it doesn't get us anywhere,

1189
01:44:48,800 --> 01:44:51,520
Like how as an individual can I
even do that? But remember this

1190
01:44:51,720 --> 01:44:56,439
was supposed to be like a practical
way at least that's the end. When

1191
01:44:56,439 --> 01:45:00,720
you initially made this argument a few
weeks ago, it it was sort of

1192
01:45:00,880 --> 01:45:03,039
like, well, when I was
Protestant, I found this to be very

1193
01:45:03,119 --> 01:45:09,319
convincing as a kind of a practical
ish argument to tell me that Catholicism is

1194
01:45:09,399 --> 01:45:13,079
true. But as we drill into
it now it turns into a situation where

1195
01:45:13,439 --> 01:45:17,319
I've got to actually go be a
ghostbuster and figure out which of the individual

1196
01:45:17,359 --> 01:45:20,319
miracle claims is true or not.
Now we're at a point where it's like

1197
01:45:20,439 --> 01:45:25,640
totally like, so, so how
are you going to are you gonna do

1198
01:45:25,760 --> 01:45:28,119
that? Like, I mean,
first of all, how are you going

1199
01:45:28,159 --> 01:45:30,800
to be present for the miracles to
begin with? And since you're not,

1200
01:45:30,960 --> 01:45:34,840
you're going to be relying upon other
people's stories and claims, which how do

1201
01:45:34,920 --> 01:45:38,439
you know that those stories and claims
are true. It's kind of like it's

1202
01:45:38,520 --> 01:45:42,560
just kicking the can down the road, is the point? Yeah, I

1203
01:45:42,680 --> 01:45:46,159
think that there's some things that I'm
sure that you know talking about. I'm

1204
01:45:46,159 --> 01:45:49,279
not sure how you feel about this
with your apologetic approach, but you know,

1205
01:45:49,399 --> 01:45:53,239
you go to First Corinthians fifteen,
and it seems like Paul, I

1206
01:45:53,279 --> 01:45:56,000
mean, I know, he's dealing
with people that deny the resurrection altogether,

1207
01:45:56,119 --> 01:46:00,520
not just the resurrection of Christ,
but he's still point to things that you

1208
01:46:00,560 --> 01:46:03,880
would point to if you were trying
to prove an event, a historical event

1209
01:46:04,159 --> 01:46:10,600
like witness attestation. So I think
that that it's valid for people to point

1210
01:46:10,640 --> 01:46:14,159
to that, and I guess just
just something for the people to consider,

1211
01:46:14,520 --> 01:46:18,279
is you know, just the Okay, maybe our difference of is understanding the

1212
01:46:18,399 --> 01:46:24,840
place of evidences versus evidentialism, because
what I hear is that you approach these

1213
01:46:24,920 --> 01:46:30,640
questions as an evidentialist, and I
don't understand or I just don't understand why

1214
01:46:30,720 --> 01:46:33,239
we would be evidentialist? Is are
you an evidentialist? Is that the point?

1215
01:46:35,800 --> 01:46:42,439
Well, it seems like the what
would it make me if if we

1216
01:46:42,560 --> 01:46:46,119
both witnessed a miracle and I said
that miracle proved something that we both witnessed.

1217
01:46:46,520 --> 01:46:49,399
Would I be an evidentialist for that? Or is am I becoming an

1218
01:46:49,399 --> 01:46:56,680
evidentialism Well, evidentialism is a specific
view of epistemology and how we prove and

1219
01:46:56,840 --> 01:46:59,960
know things right, So it's it's
based on a kind of a an appear

1220
01:47:00,000 --> 01:47:04,560
miracle approach of probabilities and sort of
like you know, warrant based on stacking

1221
01:47:04,680 --> 01:47:10,199
up the evidences and making a case, which there is a place for that

1222
01:47:11,039 --> 01:47:17,079
depending upon what the what the question
is or what things are in question.

1223
01:47:18,079 --> 01:47:24,079
But if the question is about the
religion as a whole, a single evidence

1224
01:47:24,439 --> 01:47:29,680
or a miracle claim or this piece
of data doesn't work to prove the system

1225
01:47:29,760 --> 01:47:32,479
because it's a question of what the
system as a whole is, whether it's

1226
01:47:32,479 --> 01:47:38,239
true or not, and any miracle
claim is already situated within that worldview.

1227
01:47:38,640 --> 01:47:42,479
So again, think of the resurrection
claim. If a Jew, here's you

1228
01:47:42,720 --> 01:47:47,319
arguing for the historical evidences for the
resurrection. It's not that it's wrong to

1229
01:47:47,560 --> 01:47:53,880
argue that there's historical evidences that back
up the apostles, you know, claiming

1230
01:47:53,920 --> 01:47:58,359
to see Jesus resurrect and all that
there's a place for that. But just

1231
01:47:58,479 --> 01:48:00,159
pretend that I'm an unbelieving to you, Woody Allen over here, and I

1232
01:48:00,279 --> 01:48:06,800
say that, Okay, why wouldn't
a resurrection of a man be like what

1233
01:48:08,000 --> 01:48:15,880
we see in Judaism when Elijah raises
the widow's son. Yeah, so,

1234
01:48:15,560 --> 01:48:18,680
my I mean, even in the
case of the exorcisms, for example,

1235
01:48:18,800 --> 01:48:21,279
that we still have that, like
Jesus says, if I do so,

1236
01:48:21,399 --> 01:48:25,319
by demons them, by whom do
your sons cast them out? So it's

1237
01:48:25,319 --> 01:48:30,680
acknowledging that there's Jewish exorcists. I
agree. But by the way I admitted

1238
01:48:30,680 --> 01:48:33,920
earlier in our previous conversation, yes
that I agree with you that. I

1239
01:48:33,960 --> 01:48:39,359
mean, it's not a problem to
my position to say that a miracle could

1240
01:48:39,439 --> 01:48:41,840
can be done outside of the church. I don't have a problem saying that.

1241
01:48:42,239 --> 01:48:46,960
But I mean, that's another reason
why I don't believe that miracles or

1242
01:48:47,079 --> 01:48:53,920
miracle claims necessarily prove which one is
the true one. I see that.

1243
01:48:54,119 --> 01:48:57,079
But in this passage, like I
said, I guess the thing that I'm

1244
01:48:57,159 --> 01:49:02,960
hung up on is the fact that
again his Jesus in particular, which past

1245
01:49:02,960 --> 01:49:08,000
you talking about first grade is fifteen
or Oh, I'm sorry, I'm still

1246
01:49:08,359 --> 01:49:15,479
in John that John ten in nineteen
and following is that over and over again,

1247
01:49:16,359 --> 01:49:20,960
Jesus says things that would make that
are very bold about himself, that

1248
01:49:21,000 --> 01:49:26,520
would make him a blasphemer otherwise,
And so it seems like the only options

1249
01:49:26,640 --> 01:49:30,640
are this is a deception of some
kind or he's from God. It would

1250
01:49:30,640 --> 01:49:34,640
be confusing if God were Okay,
are you making the lord liar lunatic argument?

1251
01:49:34,640 --> 01:49:39,560
You under saying that's like one of
the dumbest arguments. Well, I

1252
01:49:39,600 --> 01:49:43,239
don't, I kind. When I
first brought this up, I did compare

1253
01:49:43,319 --> 01:49:47,399
this argument to that, and I
don't see why it doesn't work here because

1254
01:49:47,680 --> 01:49:53,439
he is, again, he saying
stuff that you would agree if he's not

1255
01:49:53,680 --> 01:49:59,119
God. What he's saying is blasphemous. Yeah, but that doesn't mean that

1256
01:49:59,159 --> 01:50:03,800
I would accept the lord liar lunatic
like low tier evangelical argument. I think

1257
01:50:03,840 --> 01:50:06,279
that's a terrible argument. So,
I mean, first of all, the

1258
01:50:08,119 --> 01:50:12,600
argument is actually positing the possibility that
he is a liar or a lunatic,

1259
01:50:12,720 --> 01:50:15,359
which I don't think. The New
Testament posits that. It doesn't hold that

1260
01:50:15,479 --> 01:50:18,359
out as a possibility. And it's
kind of like even C. S.

1261
01:50:18,479 --> 01:50:24,319
Lewis, who has many apologetic flaws, like even he recognized that there's something

1262
01:50:24,439 --> 01:50:30,479
kind of problematic about this idea that
apologetics should put God in the dock and

1263
01:50:30,680 --> 01:50:36,319
the unbeliever in the position of being
the judge. Even C. S.

1264
01:50:36,439 --> 01:50:41,199
Lewis, who I wouldn't say he's
totally an evidentialist, but because he at

1265
01:50:41,279 --> 01:50:45,079
times kind of makes almost transcendental types
of arguments. But he recognized that,

1266
01:50:45,159 --> 01:50:47,359
well, there's something odd about this, like there's something weird about saying that

1267
01:50:48,239 --> 01:50:55,479
the unbelieving person is in the position
to judge God. It from the outset,

1268
01:50:55,520 --> 01:51:00,720
I think does a disservice to the
whole message of Christianity that does allow

1269
01:51:00,079 --> 01:51:04,720
or say that the unbelieving person is
in any position to make a judgment on

1270
01:51:04,880 --> 01:51:10,279
God's existence or whatever you know,
or the person of Christ. It's the

1271
01:51:10,439 --> 01:51:13,520
unbelieving person that is in the dock, not God. And so it's a

1272
01:51:13,640 --> 01:51:17,439
much better apologetic argument because remember Peter
says that no of a surity that Christ

1273
01:51:17,520 --> 01:51:20,479
has risen for the dead. He
doesn't say, look, guys, it's

1274
01:51:20,760 --> 01:51:26,840
like ninety percent that maybe Jesus rose
from the dead, So let's get out

1275
01:51:26,880 --> 01:51:30,920
of our evidences. No, he
says, no of a surety that God

1276
01:51:30,039 --> 01:51:35,239
raised him from the dead. There's
no probabilism, there's no ninety percent evidential

1277
01:51:35,479 --> 01:51:42,119
stack. Let's see where the scales
tip over eighty percent. Maybe Christianity is

1278
01:51:42,159 --> 01:51:46,399
true. They just preach as if
it's absolutely certain, and that's not what

1279
01:51:46,560 --> 01:51:54,560
evidentialism. Post evidentialism is premised on
Christianity being probabilistic. That you stack things

1280
01:51:54,680 --> 01:51:58,880
up kind of like in a piecemeal
way. And again, to bring it

1281
01:51:58,920 --> 01:52:02,479
back to the epistemic point point,
like evidentialism is false as an epistemology,

1282
01:52:02,840 --> 01:52:06,680
like I can easily we can easily
refute that because it assumes all the things

1283
01:52:06,720 --> 01:52:14,600
that it wants to prove. I'm
interested to learn from you on like philosophical

1284
01:52:14,640 --> 01:52:18,439
questions like that, But I don't
know if what I'm doing is would fit

1285
01:52:18,520 --> 01:52:21,199
into that at least. Well,
you may not be aware of it,

1286
01:52:21,399 --> 01:52:25,199
but you're doing it. So the
fact that you're hold on so the fact

1287
01:52:25,239 --> 01:52:30,680
that you're not aware of having a
specific epistemic view of evidentialism doesn't mean that

1288
01:52:30,800 --> 01:52:31,520
you don't have it. It just
means you I'm not trying to be a

1289
01:52:31,560 --> 01:52:34,119
do I'm not being a dick.
I'm just saying it just means that you're

1290
01:52:34,119 --> 01:52:39,319
not aware of it. I understand. But to me, the charge that

1291
01:52:39,479 --> 01:52:43,399
I'm doing it seems it feels like
I'm following scripture to me, because Jesus

1292
01:52:43,439 --> 01:52:45,079
said, if I am not doing
the works of my father and then do

1293
01:52:45,199 --> 01:52:49,119
not believe me, Well, the
irony here is that you're actually appealing to

1294
01:52:49,680 --> 01:52:56,960
the scriptures to try to prove evidentialism, which I mean we would need to

1295
01:52:57,000 --> 01:52:59,199
believe. First of all, we
would need to believe that the scriptures are

1296
01:52:59,319 --> 01:53:04,960
true to leave in your first argument
for evidentialists, in which I'm not arguing

1297
01:53:05,039 --> 01:53:10,560
with atheists, I'm arguing with other
people that accept the strip. But yeah,

1298
01:53:10,600 --> 01:53:13,520
but interpreting the miracles in light of
the scriptures, isn't that what I'm

1299
01:53:13,560 --> 01:53:19,399
supposed to be doing. Well,
that's not consistent with the epistemic assumptions of

1300
01:53:19,439 --> 01:53:24,800
evidentialism, right, So, well, no, you're just no, No,

1301
01:53:24,920 --> 01:53:28,319
you're just not consistent. That's the
point. That's the point. But

1302
01:53:28,520 --> 01:53:30,600
Jesus, what do you think of
Jesus saying, if I am not doing

1303
01:53:30,640 --> 01:53:32,960
the works of my father, then
do not believe me in verse thirty seven,

1304
01:53:34,119 --> 01:53:39,479
Well, did you not hear my
point that this is already after multiple

1305
01:53:39,600 --> 01:53:45,119
chapters where he argued that he's the
fulfillment of the texts. Right, So,

1306
01:53:45,239 --> 01:53:49,119
like John five through nine, he
consistently argues with the Pharisees, the

1307
01:53:49,239 --> 01:53:55,359
guy in the Garden of Eden,
the guy at Mount Sinai, the guy

1308
01:53:55,439 --> 01:54:00,039
in Genesis sixteen with Abraham, that's
me. So then he's saying, well,

1309
01:54:00,079 --> 01:54:03,600
look, if you don't believe that
stuff, what about all these works?

1310
01:54:04,439 --> 01:54:08,479
Right? So it's sort of like
again, a secondary thing to appeal

1311
01:54:08,560 --> 01:54:12,760
to. I agree, like,
okay, I like that. I like

1312
01:54:12,840 --> 01:54:15,800
what you said. I think that
it's kind of like we can argue about

1313
01:54:15,840 --> 01:54:19,720
scripture all day, and obviously it's
revelation from God. But you know,

1314
01:54:19,960 --> 01:54:25,319
if it's if people are blinded,
they can't be persuaded by that, then

1315
01:54:25,560 --> 01:54:29,880
maybe they won't be persuaded by the
miracles. However, it seems like the

1316
01:54:30,000 --> 01:54:34,319
miracles kind of like, uh,
it kind of shows whose interpretation is correct,

1317
01:54:34,640 --> 01:54:36,079
you know, like, well let
me, let me, let me

1318
01:54:36,119 --> 01:54:40,720
put it this way. So,
again, a miracle is an isolated event,

1319
01:54:41,000 --> 01:54:46,640
and it's as human beings, we
are creative beings with creative faculties interpreting

1320
01:54:46,840 --> 01:54:54,439
other creative things happening and a miracle
involves some kind of element of the uncreated,

1321
01:54:54,960 --> 01:54:59,279
a supernatural presumably divine power. Here
if we're talking about christ miracles,

1322
01:55:00,000 --> 01:55:03,520
so we are reading an event and
interpreting it much the same way. And

1323
01:55:03,560 --> 01:55:06,199
this is an argument of John Damascus
by the way, Saint JOHNA. Mascus,

1324
01:55:06,239 --> 01:55:11,039
that it's much the same as we
would interpret a text. So think

1325
01:55:11,159 --> 01:55:15,560
of interpreting the scriptures in the same
way as you would read or interpret an

1326
01:55:15,600 --> 01:55:21,479
event. Where Christ is doing a
miracle. It's fundamentally the same it's and

1327
01:55:21,560 --> 01:55:27,199
the difference is just the medium.
So whether it's Christ changing water to wine

1328
01:55:27,319 --> 01:55:31,880
or walking on water or whatever,
it's it's an event that's occurring that requires

1329
01:55:32,000 --> 01:55:36,479
an interpretive context. In other words, the event doesn't stand out as a

1330
01:55:36,520 --> 01:55:42,079
brute fact. And that's another point
of evidentialism, is the idea that they

1331
01:55:42,159 --> 01:55:45,399
assume that there are brute facts that
just are what they are and they have

1332
01:55:45,479 --> 01:55:47,720
an evident meaning to them, and
that they don't have like a context that

1333
01:55:47,840 --> 01:55:53,520
gives the meaning. But you see
in the miracle of Christ doing water to

1334
01:55:53,560 --> 01:55:58,319
wine with those are all miracles that
have a holistic context of the rest of

1335
01:55:58,359 --> 01:56:00,680
the scriptures. That's why Jesus keep
saying, saying, have you not read

1336
01:56:00,720 --> 01:56:04,359
the scriptures? Did you not know
the signs of the times? A wicked

1337
01:56:04,399 --> 01:56:08,800
and adulterous generation seeks a sign and
a wonder and yet now we'll be given

1338
01:56:08,840 --> 01:56:13,680
to it. But the biblical texts
of Jonah. See, So the point

1339
01:56:13,680 --> 01:56:16,520
I'm making is just simply that that
it's really no deffin if you just think

1340
01:56:16,600 --> 01:56:21,640
about events as texts, as a
kind of text. It's literally no different

1341
01:56:21,680 --> 01:56:26,840
than interpreting or reading the biblical texts. And it's a question then of well,

1342
01:56:26,880 --> 01:56:28,760
how do we see the divinity in
this, the divine in this?

1343
01:56:29,600 --> 01:56:31,920
What is the cause or the means
by which we understand and see it as

1344
01:56:31,960 --> 01:56:39,960
something divine that can only happen by
grace, enlightening and opening the eyes of

1345
01:56:40,039 --> 01:56:44,479
the individual and their heart their news. That's the only way that we can't

1346
01:56:44,560 --> 01:56:48,800
understand the scriptures without I mean on
the road to and exactly that's my that's

1347
01:56:48,840 --> 01:56:54,560
my point right there. Yeah,
and so I just so so let me

1348
01:56:54,640 --> 01:56:58,399
rephrase, let me grant you this. Yes, God could bring you to

1349
01:56:58,560 --> 01:57:02,720
faith in a miracle event. So
let's say the woman at the well,

1350
01:57:02,760 --> 01:57:06,920
here's a great example. The woman
at the well, sees this man who

1351
01:57:08,199 --> 01:57:15,359
then knows her whole life history,
and in that event, she sees this

1352
01:57:15,680 --> 01:57:18,760
must be the son of God.
After she talks to him and he knows

1353
01:57:18,800 --> 01:57:23,079
her whole history, right, she
then runs to the other Samaritans and says,

1354
01:57:23,560 --> 01:57:25,920
I've met this prophet. He's the
son of God. Come listen to

1355
01:57:26,000 --> 01:57:30,039
him. Okay, So in this
event that's a miracle. Her eyes are

1356
01:57:30,159 --> 01:57:38,119
opened via the miracle. But what
it's not is an isolated evidentialist event that

1357
01:57:40,000 --> 01:57:44,199
that doesn't require like the grace of
God, you see. So, yeah,

1358
01:57:44,279 --> 01:57:47,760
the grace of God could use a
specific event like this to but it's

1359
01:57:47,800 --> 01:57:54,039
still couched within the context of Jesus
as the son of God, you see.

1360
01:57:55,920 --> 01:58:01,319
So it's not an evidentialist thing where
she's like stacking up evidences and it's

1361
01:58:01,439 --> 01:58:04,800
it's the grace of God using this
event, just like the grace of God

1362
01:58:04,840 --> 01:58:11,279
could use the scriptures to enlighten somebody. Right. So if I decided to

1363
01:58:11,319 --> 01:58:15,119
apply like some of the biblical principles
that I've discerned from Christ's miracles, that

1364
01:58:15,159 --> 01:58:17,640
they're good, that they free people
from demonic oppression, like I do,

1365
01:58:17,800 --> 01:58:23,800
think that it allows me to evaluate
the proof the value of certain miracles,

1366
01:58:23,840 --> 01:58:28,159
like if someone just made a water
bottle levitate, that seems to have less

1367
01:58:28,279 --> 01:58:30,479
value than Yeah, I agree with
that. Sure an exorcism, right,

1368
01:58:30,640 --> 01:58:35,720
it seems like one of those is
intransic. Cannot let me ask you a

1369
01:58:35,800 --> 01:58:44,119
question. I agree with you there. Let's look at Faustina Kowalska or Margaret

1370
01:58:44,199 --> 01:58:48,840
Mary Alcoque. Is it a valid
miracle in the same vein as these miracles

1371
01:58:48,880 --> 01:58:54,439
that we're talking about with Christ,
that the host floats around and calls her

1372
01:58:55,680 --> 01:59:00,399
Jesus' boyfriend, or that there's a
magical foreskin ring jesus foreskin is given to

1373
01:59:00,720 --> 01:59:06,399
Catherine of Sienna. Does that sound
like the same type of miracles inconsistency and

1374
01:59:06,560 --> 01:59:12,600
consonancy with the biblical quote miracles or
Jesus' works? Because you understand, the

1375
01:59:12,640 --> 01:59:15,640
reason I'm bringing that up is not
to be rude to you or mean to

1376
01:59:15,680 --> 01:59:20,239
you, but that your argument initially
was that the miracles of Catholicism would be

1377
01:59:20,439 --> 01:59:25,399
one of these key indicators to prove
Catholicism. But the miracles of Catholicism,

1378
01:59:25,479 --> 01:59:30,079
especially in tonight's survey, seem to
be bizarre, histrionic things, very akin

1379
01:59:30,199 --> 01:59:35,479
to the profits of bail when they
cut themselves. Well, there's definitely some

1380
01:59:36,000 --> 01:59:40,359
like for example, you have I
mean, Moses turns his staff into a

1381
01:59:40,439 --> 01:59:45,800
serpent. Like you're equating cutting yourself
to turning a staff to a serpent.

1382
01:59:45,479 --> 01:59:49,840
Well, I'm just saying that clearly
Moses's miracle there was not It's not as

1383
01:59:50,439 --> 01:59:54,279
since it was able to be done
by the others. It's not as impressive

1384
01:59:54,399 --> 01:59:58,720
as so there, so hold on. So now the standard is quote impressiveness.

1385
01:59:59,399 --> 02:00:02,199
Well, I'm just using I'm just
summarizing it. It's not as valuable

1386
02:00:02,279 --> 02:00:06,279
les posed as the miracles of Christ, because how are we supposed to Is

1387
02:00:06,359 --> 02:00:12,359
it self okay? Is it self
evident that some of those signs and wonders

1388
02:00:12,479 --> 02:00:15,840
are more valuable? Is there a
scale somewhere that tells me the sign and

1389
02:00:16,000 --> 02:00:21,439
wonder value? Well, because like
I said, there doesn't seem to be

1390
02:00:21,520 --> 02:00:27,159
anything good about turning a staff into
a serpent necessarily that I can discern immediately,

1391
02:00:27,720 --> 02:00:30,279
or a water bottle for you understand, that's totally arbitrary. So first

1392
02:00:30,319 --> 02:00:33,479
of all, it's a sign that
God did. God can only do good,

1393
02:00:33,840 --> 02:00:36,800
So it was good that God did
it. I'm not saying it's not

1394
02:00:36,960 --> 02:00:41,159
good. I'm just saying that it's
not as immediate UNI, because you don't

1395
02:00:41,159 --> 02:00:44,880
see erson how subjective that is.
So you just literally, you just literally

1396
02:00:44,960 --> 02:00:48,600
invented a new criteria that it has
to appear to you to be good.

1397
02:00:49,159 --> 02:00:56,399
So now subscribe good. And he
said, and he said, can Satan

1398
02:00:56,479 --> 02:01:00,960
cast ol Satan? I'm doing that
like he's clearly evaluating the It's not just

1399
02:01:00,920 --> 02:01:05,560
so it's not self evident. It's
so now I don't think you understand the

1400
02:01:05,680 --> 02:01:11,279
moves that you're making. So it's
not that it's not that Jesus miracles work

1401
02:01:11,399 --> 02:01:15,520
good. It's that what you initially
had as the thing that would prove it

1402
02:01:16,399 --> 02:01:23,399
is now having all of these other
criteria and nuances tacked onto it to make

1403
02:01:23,479 --> 02:01:28,359
it work. That's what's arbitrary.
Not is a miracle good, but what

1404
02:01:28,720 --> 02:01:33,439
was your proof of Catholicism was initially
miracles, and then when I drill into

1405
02:01:33,520 --> 02:01:39,079
it, it just gets more and
more and more qualified to be specifically your

1406
02:01:39,279 --> 02:01:43,159
criteria of the list of the miracles
that are now the good ones that are

1407
02:01:43,279 --> 02:01:46,279
maximally good, that are self evidently
good, and so none of this was

1408
02:01:46,359 --> 02:01:53,560
self evident. That's the point,
don't There's certain things that I think,

1409
02:01:54,560 --> 02:01:58,079
you know, God might have done
and Satan could also do. Right,

1410
02:01:58,760 --> 02:02:03,119
like a person might know other languages
that you might speak in tounguent from the

1411
02:02:03,159 --> 02:02:06,279
Holy Spirit, or you might speak
or a possessed person a demon. My,

1412
02:02:06,479 --> 02:02:10,880
yeah, exactly, so this is
the point. But yes, however,

1413
02:02:11,119 --> 02:02:15,560
a demon when it comes to a
healing or an extorcism, it seems

1414
02:02:15,640 --> 02:02:20,159
that, uh, it's like healing
a blind man or something like that,

1415
02:02:20,840 --> 02:02:26,039
and Jesus again describes it. You're
missing the point, So you don't under

1416
02:02:26,119 --> 02:02:30,520
you don't know if these things actually
occurred in the claims of the Roman Catholic

1417
02:02:30,600 --> 02:02:34,439
Church. That's the point. How
do I know the difference between let's let's

1418
02:02:34,439 --> 02:02:39,640
say I want to investigate Catholicism.
How do I know the difference between a

1419
02:02:39,800 --> 02:02:45,520
real miracle of Margaret alco Alacque carving
Jesus name into her chest and then signing

1420
02:02:45,560 --> 02:02:50,720
a pact in blood and Catherine of
Sienna receiving a foreskin ring from Jesus.

1421
02:02:51,359 --> 02:02:56,079
Is that a real miracle or is
that a sign or wonder that could be

1422
02:02:56,239 --> 02:02:59,960
mimicked? How do I know?
Well, yeah, with those miracles,

1423
02:03:00,039 --> 02:03:02,520
I would say, you're probably not
culpable for not being persuaded by those even

1424
02:03:03,039 --> 02:03:09,279
But wait a minute. So there's
this vast tier in your system of the

1425
02:03:09,399 --> 02:03:12,960
miracles of Catholicism, the ones that
really prove it, the ones that kind

1426
02:03:13,000 --> 02:03:15,199
of prove it. Do you understand
that's what's arbitrary. Do you not see

1427
02:03:15,239 --> 02:03:18,680
why that's arbitrary? I think that
well. I think for example, with

1428
02:03:18,760 --> 02:03:21,920
the Jews, for example, I
think Jesus is condemning them partially because they

1429
02:03:23,039 --> 02:03:26,840
have the interpretive lens to understand the
miracles. They have the scriptures right,

1430
02:03:27,560 --> 02:03:30,239
so they they should understand that.
Now, So for me, if I

1431
02:03:30,279 --> 02:03:32,880
were to reject a miracle that's been
accepted by the Church, I would be

1432
02:03:32,960 --> 02:03:35,560
culpable for that. But I don't
think you have the framework for that.

1433
02:03:35,800 --> 02:03:40,960
But the culpability has nothing to do
with the original point, which was that

1434
02:03:41,199 --> 02:03:44,039
the miracles are supposed to tell me
the Catholicism true. This was your whole

1435
02:03:44,079 --> 02:03:47,199
point the whole time. Well,
I think that if something is proven to

1436
02:03:47,279 --> 02:03:54,000
be true, then someone is culpable
for rejecting it. Okay, culpability relates

1437
02:03:54,039 --> 02:04:00,840
to the topic, But what does
that have to do with proving Catholicism because

1438
02:04:01,600 --> 02:04:05,439
the miracles of Jesus, the works
he did, the good works he did,

1439
02:04:05,920 --> 02:04:11,319
demonstrate that he was from the Father. Despite the Pharisees disagree with his

1440
02:04:11,399 --> 02:04:15,920
interpretation of scripture, he validated his
interpretation. It demonstrated they were demonstrated to

1441
02:04:16,000 --> 02:04:21,600
be true by the good But again
you're missing the epistemic point again that the

1442
02:04:21,840 --> 02:04:28,800
claims, how do I know of
which miracles are true or false? And

1443
02:04:28,920 --> 02:04:30,439
you can't just say, well,
you're not really culpable for not knowing that

1444
02:04:30,560 --> 02:04:35,239
Roman Catholic miracles. You said initially
when you came on the other night that

1445
02:04:35,880 --> 02:04:43,520
the vast number of the wild I
forget the exact terminology, but you said

1446
02:04:43,520 --> 02:04:45,960
that the many, many, many
claims of Catholic miracles is one of the

1447
02:04:46,039 --> 02:04:53,239
reasons why you found Catholicism convincing.
And so do you not see that every

1448
02:04:53,319 --> 02:04:59,319
time we drill into this you just
tack on arbitrarily all of these nuances that

1449
02:04:59,479 --> 02:05:02,800
ultimately end up saying the Catholic miracles
are the ones that prove the Catholic Church.

1450
02:05:02,840 --> 02:05:05,560
And we know that because they're the
Catholic miracles that the Catholic Church are

1451
02:05:05,600 --> 02:05:09,560
proofs. That's really what you end
up doing here. Well, I don't

1452
02:05:09,560 --> 02:05:12,880
think I'm doing it. Earlier you
agreed with me that earlier. You agree

1453
02:05:12,920 --> 02:05:15,800
that, like a healing is more
valuable than a levit hitting water bottle.

1454
02:05:15,880 --> 02:05:17,760
Right, yeah, but it's more
valuable based on the paradigm that I have.

1455
02:05:18,039 --> 02:05:20,840
And the paradigm is the thing in
question. You keep begging the question.

1456
02:05:21,439 --> 02:05:26,000
I'm saying, based on our shared
paradigm, there is no share paradigm.

1457
02:05:26,159 --> 02:05:29,760
There's only one paradigm. And then
people that misappropriate and you, so

1458
02:05:29,840 --> 02:05:33,239
again you misunder you misunderstand what a
paradigm is and how this works. So

1459
02:05:33,399 --> 02:05:36,560
again, just go back to the
analogy of the Jew, right, like,

1460
02:05:36,720 --> 02:05:42,600
the Jew has a different paradigm and
he interprets a resurrection of some guy

1461
02:05:43,239 --> 02:05:48,479
to confirm Judaism. So, and
you're missing the point that when you respond

1462
02:05:48,600 --> 02:05:54,239
to a Jew when he believes that
a resurrected guy proves Judaism, what you

1463
02:05:54,399 --> 02:05:59,000
then do is make my point by
tacking on all the rest of the system

1464
02:05:59,720 --> 02:06:03,399
to prove that Christianity is the one
that makes sense of this Jesus guy resurrecting

1465
02:06:03,439 --> 02:06:08,079
and not Judaism. So, in
other words, guess what that means that

1466
02:06:08,279 --> 02:06:13,239
the miracles are not brute facts that
prove it. So I like the example

1467
02:06:13,279 --> 02:06:15,920
with the Jew because notice that the
Jews did not respond to jesus As exorcism

1468
02:06:16,000 --> 02:06:19,680
with well, we have exorcisms too. Jesus pointed out they also had them.

1469
02:06:19,880 --> 02:06:24,159
It wasn't enough for them to also
have them. They had to explain

1470
02:06:24,279 --> 02:06:30,439
why this seemingly blasphemous man was capable
of doing it, and they, through

1471
02:06:30,560 --> 02:06:35,319
their their hardness of heart, chose
to explain it away. Okay, by

1472
02:06:35,439 --> 02:06:39,640
demons. None of that has anything
to do with the epistemic point. So

1473
02:06:39,720 --> 02:06:43,479
you just keep going to telling me
the big stories. You're missing the point.

1474
02:06:43,920 --> 02:06:47,840
How Look, it's not you keep
saying I'm arbitrary, But do you

1475
02:06:48,399 --> 02:06:53,399
not understand that I have a principle
by which I say that I think an

1476
02:06:53,439 --> 02:06:57,399
exorcism has more value than an apparition. Do you can you articulate to me

1477
02:06:57,479 --> 02:07:00,600
one the reason why you believe that
is because you believe the story of the

1478
02:07:00,680 --> 02:07:05,560
scriptures and Christianity, Right, That's
why you believe that. That's so what

1479
02:07:05,680 --> 02:07:11,680
you're tacking on is not self evident
in the miracles. That's why miracles aren't

1480
02:07:11,680 --> 02:07:16,000
self evident to prove the paradigm,
and you're proving that by every time I

1481
02:07:16,119 --> 02:07:19,279
drill into it, you tack on
all of these other points from the rest

1482
02:07:19,319 --> 02:07:23,760
of the scriptures that you presuppose as
a Christian. That's the point. Well,

1483
02:07:24,079 --> 02:07:27,039
if I said it was self evident
from the miracle in itself at any

1484
02:07:27,119 --> 02:07:30,279
point, I apologize for that.
That's not what Well, but you're misunderstood.

1485
02:07:30,479 --> 02:07:33,159
That's why you came to this debate
was to say that miracles proved Catholicism.

1486
02:07:33,520 --> 02:07:39,640
That was your whole point. I'm
saying that I believed the scriptures were

1487
02:07:39,680 --> 02:07:45,960
infallible, and that I think that
if you take the worldview you get from

1488
02:07:45,079 --> 02:07:50,000
reading the Gospels and the way you
evaluate evidence, the way that Jesus disciples

1489
02:07:50,079 --> 02:07:55,680
did versus the Pharisees, that it
gets it challenges you when you then see

1490
02:07:56,159 --> 02:08:00,800
this lofty church that makes lofty claims
of herself doing these miraculous things, and

1491
02:08:01,079 --> 02:08:03,600
when people have a demon position,
they know where to go, you know,

1492
02:08:03,800 --> 02:08:09,279
And I feel like that has some
value as evidence for Catholicism. Well,

1493
02:08:09,359 --> 02:08:13,079
okay, so it's evidence for Catholicism
based on a Roman Catholic reading of

1494
02:08:13,159 --> 02:08:16,680
the texts and of church history.
So That's why when I ask you that

1495
02:08:16,960 --> 02:08:22,279
thousands of people in Zietun and Egypt
seeing Mary appear above a Coptic church,

1496
02:08:22,880 --> 02:08:26,319
you're totally inconsistent in arbitrary when you
tell me that, well, that one

1497
02:08:26,399 --> 02:08:35,439
doesn't count because that's different. Why
does that not prove Coptic Christianity Because of

1498
02:08:35,520 --> 02:08:39,640
the fact, there's a few reasons
that it come to my mind immediately,

1499
02:08:41,359 --> 02:08:45,720
but because one of the premises that
I also have. Keep in mind,

1500
02:08:45,720 --> 02:08:48,439
I'm coming from a guy who all
I did was read the Bible. So

1501
02:08:48,680 --> 02:08:50,600
we're both assuming that the scriptures are
true, okay, just like the Jews

1502
02:08:50,640 --> 02:08:54,720
and Jesus assume they were true.
Okay, So we're all assuming that.

1503
02:08:56,960 --> 02:09:01,439
And I am then knowing that God
is not the author of confusion. And

1504
02:09:01,560 --> 02:09:05,880
so I think that a church that
is expressed in every part of the world

1505
02:09:07,560 --> 02:09:11,119
by a large number of people being
known from you. You don't understand that

1506
02:09:11,640 --> 02:09:18,119
all of these things that you're tacking
on are just interpretations from your Catholic presuppositions.

1507
02:09:18,159 --> 02:09:22,039
And that's the thing in question.
So Catholic, I think you would

1508
02:09:22,039 --> 02:09:26,319
agree with me. Literally, what
you just argued is the classic Roman Catholic

1509
02:09:26,439 --> 02:09:31,479
argument that we have the miracle claims
throughout the world. Therefore you do the

1510
02:09:31,600 --> 02:09:35,039
numbers game. That's exactly what you
said. What do you mean? But

1511
02:09:35,079 --> 02:09:39,359
I mean, do you not see
where I'm getting this from scriptures? No?

1512
02:09:39,600 --> 02:09:43,840
I do not see that because it's
based on your Roman Catholic interpretation of

1513
02:09:43,920 --> 02:09:46,479
all of those texts, because you
come from a Roman Catholic paradigm. I

1514
02:09:46,600 --> 02:09:50,560
was Protestant when I came to this
conclusion. That doesn't that All that tells

1515
02:09:50,600 --> 02:09:54,640
me is that you just made more
mistakes. So what so tell me why

1516
02:09:54,640 --> 02:10:00,359
I'm supposed to believe that the Marian
apparition doesn't prove Coptic theology. And now

1517
02:10:00,399 --> 02:10:05,479
you're saying, ah, it's not
just the miracle apparition event, it's the

1518
02:10:05,920 --> 02:10:09,720
number and the quantity of it.
You just tacked on a new thing that

1519
02:10:09,880 --> 02:10:13,359
you got from the Bible, by
the way, which is assuming the position

1520
02:10:13,479 --> 02:10:18,760
in question, your Catholic interpretation of
the Bible. But so you don't understand

1521
02:10:18,760 --> 02:10:22,680
that, you just keep appealing to
more things that are in question, and

1522
02:10:22,800 --> 02:10:26,800
the very thing that's in question is
not proven yet. Well. In John

1523
02:10:26,880 --> 02:10:30,960
fourteen, Jesus said that his disciples
those that followed him would do the work

1524
02:10:31,039 --> 02:10:33,199
he did. And then in Matthew
twenty eight, do you not understand that

1525
02:10:33,399 --> 02:10:39,000
as add his apostles to go all
over the world, that doesn't prove the

1526
02:10:39,079 --> 02:10:43,880
position. A Coptic person can say
the same thing. Yeah, exactly,

1527
02:10:43,920 --> 02:10:46,039
and that proves Coptic theology because we
have the married apparitions. If you go

1528
02:10:46,079 --> 02:10:50,760
on YouTube, there's a Coptic exorcist. So the very things that you've listed

1529
02:10:50,840 --> 02:10:56,680
as things that Satan can't do exorcisms, these apparitions to thousands of people literally

1530
02:10:56,840 --> 02:11:05,520
is done by schismatics. And from
your okay, I I think I appreciate

1531
02:11:05,600 --> 02:11:07,880
you giving me a very large time
to talk about this, and you know

1532
02:11:09,119 --> 02:11:11,760
we're at an impasse, but I
do. Okay, so we're at an

1533
02:11:11,800 --> 02:11:16,880
empass. But why would I not
be a Coptic? Why would you not

1534
02:11:16,960 --> 02:11:20,079
be a Well? I think it's
the lack of Catholicity is one good proof.

1535
02:11:20,159 --> 02:11:26,000
Do you understand that Catholicity is not
numbers? You didn't know that every

1536
02:11:26,119 --> 02:11:30,840
tribe, tongue, nation and people. Oh my gosh, So you've never

1537
02:11:30,920 --> 02:11:37,479
heard the response of this. Really, so you say the Catholicity so so

1538
02:11:37,640 --> 02:11:41,039
in the fourth century, in the
fourth century was the Aryan Church the true

1539
02:11:41,119 --> 02:11:48,520
Church because it had the numbers.
No, why not? Where was Catholicity?

1540
02:11:50,039 --> 02:11:52,079
Well, I don't think it's numbers. I believe that you just argued

1541
02:11:52,119 --> 02:11:56,199
it was numbers. Come on,
No, every tribe, tongue, nation,

1542
02:11:56,399 --> 02:12:00,800
that's a version of numbers arguments.
Dude, Come on, but scriptures

1543
02:12:00,920 --> 02:12:03,680
say that there will be men out
of every tribe tie. So obviously Catholicity

1544
02:12:03,800 --> 02:12:09,279
can't be determined by the numbers and
the expanse. No, but if it's

1545
02:12:09,359 --> 02:12:13,520
if they if a church is pretty
much geographically limited to a particular region of

1546
02:12:13,600 --> 02:12:16,000
the world. So here we go. This is this arbitrary. Okay,

1547
02:12:16,119 --> 02:12:20,199
so where we're Where were how many
bishops were Orthodox in the Arean Crisis?

1548
02:12:22,640 --> 02:12:26,319
I'm not sure about You don't even
know. It's famously it's like five bishops

1549
02:12:26,359 --> 02:12:30,600
in Athenasis, So it's famous,
right, I knew it was very if

1550
02:12:30,640 --> 02:12:33,039
you I've heard James why I talk
about like his you know? Okay?

1551
02:12:33,279 --> 02:12:37,399
So yeah, So so guess what. Catholicity can't be a numbers game.

1552
02:12:37,800 --> 02:12:39,840
No, I don't think like I
said, I don't think it's a numbers

1553
02:12:39,920 --> 02:12:43,760
game. You literally just argued it's
a numbers game, by the way that

1554
02:12:43,880 --> 02:12:46,920
you interpreted the expanse and the limit
and the and the the every that you

1555
02:12:48,000 --> 02:12:50,119
can still have every tribetelling nation and
believe that the Church can be reduced to

1556
02:12:50,159 --> 02:12:56,199
a small number. I mean,
okay, don't you believe For example,

1557
02:12:56,239 --> 02:12:58,119
if I started, do you think, do you see what there is?

1558
02:12:58,159 --> 02:13:01,680
The point of all this is that
all of these passages and all of your

1559
02:13:01,840 --> 02:13:09,399
arguments are based on Catholic Roman Catholic
presuppositions of reading all of these texts and

1560
02:13:09,479 --> 02:13:13,319
these arguments. And that's the thing
in question. That's why I kept calling

1561
02:13:13,359 --> 02:13:18,079
you arbitrary. I don't, well, what do you think that every tribe,

1562
02:13:18,119 --> 02:13:22,119
tong nation of people is not part
of Catholicity? Was it still true

1563
02:13:22,199 --> 02:13:30,760
in the fourth century when there was
a handful of bishops. The Church can

1564
02:13:30,840 --> 02:13:33,840
be small in number at some point. But we have now, we have

1565
02:13:33,000 --> 02:13:37,800
two thousand years of church history and
we see which which church, which branches

1566
02:13:37,800 --> 02:13:41,439
are I think that so it's not
numbers. And that's why I say.

1567
02:13:41,520 --> 02:13:45,760
Maximus says when he was being persecuted
and was tortured, that I would be

1568
02:13:45,840 --> 02:13:48,800
amongst the band of true Catholics even
if they were reduced to a small number?

1569
02:13:50,680 --> 02:13:54,760
Did he reduce? Did he equate
Catholicity with one guy in Rome?

1570
02:13:54,920 --> 02:13:58,279
By the way, your church actually
equates Catholicity, not just with numbers which

1571
02:13:58,279 --> 02:14:01,039
they roll out when I want to
use it, but actually with one guy

1572
02:14:01,119 --> 02:14:09,119
in Rome. How is one guy
in Roman Catholicity? The I mean I

1573
02:14:09,319 --> 02:14:16,239
I don't see that. The I
don't understand the connection you're making. Really,

1574
02:14:16,840 --> 02:14:20,600
you don't think you don't think that
Vatican One locates the essence of Catholicity

1575
02:14:20,640 --> 02:14:26,640
in the Roman Sea and in submitting
to and no in the Roman Sea?

1576
02:14:28,319 --> 02:14:31,960
Oh, the essence of Okay,
am I a Catholic if I'm outside of

1577
02:14:33,039 --> 02:14:37,239
community with the Roman Se In the
traditional view, no, so Catholicity is

1578
02:14:37,319 --> 02:14:41,800
primarily first and foremost communion with the
Roman Sea. When I'm saying, though,

1579
02:14:41,960 --> 02:14:43,479
you can't be said unless you're in
communion with Romani, I don't think

1580
02:14:43,520 --> 02:14:46,600
that. I don't think that any
Catholic would say Therefore, Catholic doesn't mean

1581
02:14:46,640 --> 02:14:52,000
the word catholic, you know,
like therefore just because that's a condition doesn't

1582
02:14:52,039 --> 02:14:56,000
mean it's the only there's the word
doesn't mean things outside of that. There's

1583
02:14:56,000 --> 02:14:58,560
not other evidence we can point to
that, like, don't you think that

1584
02:14:58,880 --> 02:15:03,960
the Roman Again, the point is
that in the Orthodox Church, Catholicity is

1585
02:15:03,039 --> 02:15:07,640
the fullness of truth. And that's
consistent with the idea that you can have

1586
02:15:07,840 --> 02:15:11,520
periods where the church is reduced to
a small number. It is not consistent

1587
02:15:11,680 --> 02:15:16,760
with the Roman Catholic pop apologetic argument
that we're the true church because the big

1588
02:15:16,880 --> 02:15:20,920
numbers bro and also because of that
guy over in Rome, he's the essence

1589
02:15:20,920 --> 02:15:26,760
of Catholicity. Well, I'm not
saying that it's so you reject out right.

1590
02:15:26,880 --> 02:15:31,279
You don't think that some tainy little
church, you know, in a

1591
02:15:31,560 --> 02:15:35,399
small place has they have just as
much of a claim on this basis alone.

1592
02:15:35,720 --> 02:15:39,359
They have just as much of a
claim to Catholicity as like the Orthodox

1593
02:15:39,840 --> 02:15:43,399
Church. I didn't say that the
church will will always have four marks of

1594
02:15:43,479 --> 02:15:46,520
being one, Holy, Catholic,
and Apostolic. But I'm saying that I

1595
02:15:46,600 --> 02:15:52,560
can from the outset discount the Roman
Catholic assumption that Catholicity is numbers. That's

1596
02:15:52,600 --> 02:15:56,039
all that's intended to show. And
I never said that. I just you

1597
02:15:56,199 --> 02:16:01,199
made an argument on the basis of
Catholic are argument Catholic miracles because there's so

1598
02:16:01,319 --> 02:16:07,000
many of them, and it's so
universal. That's what trumps the claims of

1599
02:16:07,119 --> 02:16:11,800
the Coptics to be the true Church. And I'm just simply showing why that's

1600
02:16:11,840 --> 02:16:16,720
not a good reply to the Coptic
argument. So you don't believe that.

1601
02:16:18,079 --> 02:16:22,319
So if we if both churches have
miracles, but one of them, I

1602
02:16:22,399 --> 02:16:24,319
don't accept. I'm just alsoting the
point that I'm not going to make my

1603
02:16:24,399 --> 02:16:28,880
decision on the basis of apparition claims. And you keep saying that and assuming

1604
02:16:28,960 --> 02:16:33,879
that it is a miracle, and
my position is that I don't know if

1605
02:16:33,920 --> 02:16:37,040
it's miracles or not. Why would
I assume that that's the right way to

1606
02:16:37,159 --> 02:16:39,559
choose the church. It makes no
sense. It's a dumb way to do

1607
02:16:39,639 --> 02:16:43,719
it. So I'm sorry that you
chose a dumb way to make your decision,

1608
02:16:43,840 --> 02:16:46,440
But that's just the way it is. It seems like the Gospels want

1609
02:16:46,479 --> 02:16:50,200
me to think that way. That's
just your Catholic interpretation and misinterpretation of the

1610
02:16:50,239 --> 02:16:54,440
Gospels. I'm sorry you misinterpreted it. My bad, I mean you're bad.

1611
02:16:54,280 --> 02:16:58,920
I mean I mean it kept bringing
it keeps you and you see why.

1612
02:17:00,079 --> 02:17:01,319
I think that though it's not just
that I'm Catholic. It's that,

1613
02:17:01,559 --> 02:17:03,959
Yeah, you bought into a bad
argument as to why you should be a

1614
02:17:05,000 --> 02:17:07,479
Catholic, and many Catholics by into
that. Yeah, and we're we're seeing

1615
02:17:07,520 --> 02:17:13,239
it illustrated in this discussion. Wise, bad Catholics never offered this argument to

1616
02:17:13,319 --> 02:17:16,079
me. I just I just okay, Well you invented your own bad Catholic

1617
02:17:16,159 --> 02:17:22,040
argument even worse. No, I
don't think it. I really don't think

1618
02:17:22,239 --> 02:17:26,840
that, uh that it's that bad. I think you kind of misunderstood.

1619
02:17:28,120 --> 02:17:31,479
No, it's just again like you
can't tell me why I shouldn't be coptic,

1620
02:17:31,879 --> 02:17:37,159
and when I bring it up,
you sort of invent and play with

1621
02:17:37,399 --> 02:17:39,559
new ways to get around that objection
by saying, well, they're not,

1622
02:17:39,840 --> 02:17:43,120
uh, they don't Catholicity in terms
of numbers. Well it's not really the

1623
02:17:43,239 --> 02:17:46,600
numbers. It's like, uh,
you know, it's just they're just coptic

1624
02:17:46,719 --> 02:17:50,559
or whatever. But I mean,
what's the why should I not be comptic?

1625
02:17:50,799 --> 02:17:56,959
Well, moving away from because you
haven't responded to it. You you

1626
02:17:58,239 --> 02:18:01,319
you skirt it every time, because
it's a really clear way to show that

1627
02:18:01,399 --> 02:18:05,360
this is a I'm not coming up
with this ad hoc to argue with you,

1628
02:18:05,479 --> 02:18:09,680
but you are because your response was
Roman Catholic approaches to numbers. Well,

1629
02:18:11,479 --> 02:18:13,399
just to let you know, I
had to deal with this already,

1630
02:18:13,479 --> 02:18:16,920
you because I came from a charismatic
background, okay, when I was growing

1631
02:18:16,000 --> 02:18:18,559
up, and so I dealt with
miracle claims all the time. Well,

1632
02:18:18,600 --> 02:18:24,840
no, wonder you made these choices. That's why. So I dealt with

1633
02:18:24,920 --> 02:18:28,120
these all the time. And some
of the thing is, for one thing,

1634
02:18:30,280 --> 02:18:33,760
the most of the miracles I heard
about were, like the examples,

1635
02:18:33,840 --> 02:18:37,680
you get very goofy okay, or
they seemed very goofy. I don't want

1636
02:18:37,680 --> 02:18:41,360
to be sacrilegious, but like some
of them seem very goofy. You talking

1637
02:18:41,399 --> 02:18:46,719
about the charismatic claims, many of
the ones I was exposed to, Yes,

1638
02:18:46,959 --> 02:18:52,200
uh huh okay. And I'm not
saying that they all are, that

1639
02:18:52,280 --> 02:18:56,360
none of them are legitimate, But
I'm just saying that I had to deal

1640
02:18:56,399 --> 02:19:00,239
with that. And then also the
fact that the history behind these which is

1641
02:19:00,319 --> 02:19:03,639
now. I guess the Coptics kind
of are are better off because they're apostolic,

1642
02:19:03,760 --> 02:19:07,760
but or maybe they are, I
don't know, you can tell me,

1643
02:19:07,879 --> 02:19:11,719
but so I suppose they're better off
in that way. But I already

1644
02:19:11,719 --> 02:19:16,840
had to deal with the fact that
it just impressed upon me immediately that because

1645
02:19:16,920 --> 02:19:20,719
God is not the author of confusion, the miracles would not serve as evidence

1646
02:19:20,799 --> 02:19:24,319
for a small, irrelevant, comparatively
irrelevant branch of Christians. Okay, but

1647
02:19:24,639 --> 02:19:31,639
so from my Vanther's point, the
confusion is readily apparent in the insane women

1648
02:19:31,760 --> 02:19:35,799
miracles that we've listed tonight. To
me, that's complete confusion. If I

1649
02:19:35,879 --> 02:19:37,600
read the story of Elige and the
Prophets of Bail, that the prophets of

1650
02:19:37,639 --> 02:19:43,159
bail are the ones carving themselves with
knives, and then I see Margaret maryel

1651
02:19:43,200 --> 02:19:46,840
and coke Way carving herself with a
knife and signing a pact in blood.

1652
02:19:46,399 --> 02:19:58,120
How is that not a profit of
bail. That's an interesting question I don't

1653
02:19:58,200 --> 02:20:01,319
immediately have I'll just immediately say,
I don't immediately have a Well, there

1654
02:20:01,360 --> 02:20:03,280
was a bunch of other women too, like the other the offensive that you

1655
02:20:03,360 --> 02:20:07,840
know that might be offensive to you, I would be surprised, not offensive

1656
02:20:07,879 --> 02:20:11,120
to me. I don't like.
I don't are weird. It's weird sounding,

1657
02:20:11,360 --> 02:20:16,760
right, but I would be surprised
if there were no odd miracles,

1658
02:20:16,200 --> 02:20:22,559
miracle claims among the Orthodox. You
know, I'm not aware of like carving

1659
02:20:22,719 --> 02:20:26,159
into your chest. I mean,
well, I wasn't aware of that and

1660
02:20:26,959 --> 02:20:31,280
in my faith until you've introduced it
to me. I mean, these are

1661
02:20:31,319 --> 02:20:33,520
famous Roman Catholic women sayings. You
never heard of Margaret Mary ala Coque,

1662
02:20:35,760 --> 02:20:39,040
You never heard of Catherine of Siana. I mean I heard about all these

1663
02:20:39,040 --> 02:20:41,559
people when I became I know what, Catherine of Sienna, but I'm not.

1664
02:20:41,319 --> 02:20:46,239
I don't I've not been Catholic very
long. I mainly read the Bible.

1665
02:20:46,719 --> 02:20:52,040
And so you're a Protestant Catholic.
No, you believe in the Saints.

1666
02:20:52,319 --> 02:20:56,959
I believe in them and I pray
to them. And in fact,

1667
02:20:58,040 --> 02:20:58,879
it was, well, I'm saying
you may what you're saying, you may

1668
02:21:00,159 --> 02:21:03,079
read the Bible, And I'm like, is that Protestant of me? To

1669
02:21:03,719 --> 02:21:05,840
I would say that's a pretty Protestant
move. Yeah. The truth Well,

1670
02:21:05,840 --> 02:21:11,479
I grew up Protestants, so it's
a habit. But I the church encourages

1671
02:21:11,520 --> 02:21:15,840
a three scripture right. In fact, don't you kind of mock Catholic sometimes

1672
02:21:15,879 --> 02:21:18,360
for being kind of biblically illiterate.
I was just making a joke, dude,

1673
02:21:18,559 --> 02:21:20,799
I'm just saying, like, it's
funny to me, but but I

1674
02:21:20,840 --> 02:21:24,799
mean, Roman Catholicism, isn't you
know, you reading your Bible, it's

1675
02:21:24,079 --> 02:21:28,680
you know, it's all these other
things too, you know, it's it's

1676
02:21:28,760 --> 02:21:33,760
Margaret Mary Ala cocoy. That's very
that's just as much part of the deposit

1677
02:21:33,879 --> 02:21:35,000
of the faith, so to speak, in terms of ordinary, because I

1678
02:21:35,040 --> 02:21:41,719
believe saints in the Roman Gallic Church
are at least ordinary magisterium, if not,

1679
02:21:41,360 --> 02:21:46,319
if not extraordinary, I don't I'm
not sure you could say that miracle

1680
02:21:46,360 --> 02:21:48,719
claims are as much the deposit of
the face as like revelation being given by

1681
02:21:48,920 --> 02:21:54,000
like and and it's not as if
this was introduced by like. I'm not

1682
02:21:54,079 --> 02:21:56,479
sure how that works with the magisterium. And I was saying, I reject

1683
02:21:56,479 --> 02:21:58,600
these miracles claims at all, But
I wouldn't say it's part of the deposit

1684
02:21:58,680 --> 02:22:03,079
of faith, like these modern miracle
plans. I don't think any Catholic would

1685
02:22:03,079 --> 02:22:13,799
say that. So the Thomas guy
is saying he's not ready. He says,

1686
02:22:13,920 --> 02:22:20,120
I'm getting settled. I have friends
around, Okay, whatever, what

1687
02:22:20,319 --> 02:22:26,680
was your last comment. I was
saying, I mean this might be my

1688
02:22:26,879 --> 02:22:31,799
you know, because I'm a neophyte, you might say, I, but

1689
02:22:31,959 --> 02:22:37,040
it doesn't that would surprise me if
we would describe like more recent miracle flames

1690
02:22:37,079 --> 02:22:41,079
as part of the depositive faith.
I'm not saying that they're not true or

1691
02:22:41,120 --> 02:22:45,360
that you shouldn't believe. Well,
so you're right that technically depositive faith would

1692
02:22:45,399 --> 02:22:50,040
be relating to like the dogmas of
the Roman Catholic Church and the Apostolic depositive

1693
02:22:50,079 --> 02:22:56,239
faith, but that that's not all. It's like saying that you know what

1694
02:22:56,399 --> 02:22:58,600
am I bound to As a Muslim? Am I just bound to the Koran?

1695
02:23:00,079 --> 02:23:01,360
We're also bound to the Hadiths?
Well, guess what? As a

1696
02:23:01,440 --> 02:23:07,000
Roman Catholic, you're also bound to
the magisterium. And the confirmation of the

1697
02:23:07,120 --> 02:23:11,440
lives of the saints is part of
the magistarium. Right, Yeah, And

1698
02:23:11,559 --> 02:23:16,920
I would say those miracles are not
They would not have persuaded me to go

1699
02:23:16,040 --> 02:23:20,440
from Protestants Catholic, but as a
Catholic, I embrace them. I think

1700
02:23:20,479 --> 02:23:24,280
that there's I mean, I think
this is common. There are certain doctrines

1701
02:23:24,319 --> 02:23:26,159
for which there is less evidence than
others. There are certain miracles that are

1702
02:23:26,239 --> 02:23:31,799
less impressive or persuasive than others.
I don't think that that's a problem.

1703
02:23:35,399 --> 02:23:37,959
Well, but I'm just making the
point that like you got to accept,

1704
02:23:37,360 --> 02:23:39,799
like you can. You can sit
there and read your Bible all day as

1705
02:23:39,840 --> 02:23:46,239
a Catholic, but you believe all
of this goofy history on it, women's

1706
02:23:46,239 --> 02:23:48,479
saint stuff too. This is part
of your faith. The Jews thought it

1707
02:23:48,559 --> 02:23:52,360
was goofy when Jesus said you eat
my flesh and dream my blood. Right,

1708
02:23:52,559 --> 02:23:54,719
Okay, So if you want to
equate, if you want to equate

1709
02:23:54,920 --> 02:23:58,079
the real presence of Christ to Margaret
Mary Ala coquit carving or Jesus name in

1710
02:23:58,120 --> 02:24:01,920
her chest, you can do that. But I'm not going to do that.

1711
02:24:03,040 --> 02:24:05,760
Oh. I mean, look,
go for it, bro have fun

1712
02:24:05,479 --> 02:24:11,239
with the women's saints carving into their
chest. Go all out, man,

1713
02:24:11,799 --> 02:24:15,680
you go carve. I guess that's
if you really believe it. I think

1714
02:24:15,719 --> 02:24:22,920
there's a Filipino tradition where they actually
do like crucifixions. So go for it.

1715
02:24:22,600 --> 02:24:33,040
Have fun with that faith. Coda. We've got a super chat from

1716
02:24:33,360 --> 02:24:35,760
Rolf Stakes five dollars. Will you
do a stream responding to the goofy Thomas

1717
02:24:35,840 --> 02:24:39,440
that say that Orthodoxy is made up? I mean as such a low tier

1718
02:24:39,600 --> 02:24:46,280
argument. I'm kind of surprised they're
delving to that level. But I have

1719
02:24:46,479 --> 02:24:52,920
a extensive response to the whole trinity
monarchy fully oquay stuff with doctor Branson right

1720
02:24:52,959 --> 02:24:58,799
here. He of course is you
know, PhD in Cappadocian thought and theology.

1721
02:25:00,479 --> 02:25:05,120
So I would just say check that
out. A lot of these people

1722
02:25:05,200 --> 02:25:11,280
are just they actually think that just
regurgitating what Aquinas says constitutes an argument,

1723
02:25:13,000 --> 02:25:18,840
because they actually have the medieval idea
that just simply citing authorities is an argument.

1724
02:25:18,879 --> 02:25:22,559
I kid you not. I'm realizing
more and more that they don't really

1725
02:25:22,799 --> 02:25:31,479
exist in a I don't know,
post medieval mscept things because Aquinas or Aristotle

1726
02:25:31,559 --> 02:25:37,200
said it anymore. They're still living
in their medieval LARP world where if Aquinas

1727
02:25:37,239 --> 02:25:43,200
said it, it's true. And
why would I accept that because Aquinas said,

1728
02:25:43,239 --> 02:25:48,319
I mean, this is just silly
anyway, Lathe five dollars, Kuran

1729
02:25:48,920 --> 02:25:52,959
three, five, five, and
sixty one four show that the correct followers.

1730
02:25:52,079 --> 02:25:56,079
Oh we already read that one.
Excuse me. I scrolled back,

1731
02:25:58,799 --> 02:26:01,799
Chris MT five dollars. I saw
that old debate you did with liquid Zulu,

1732
02:26:01,840 --> 02:26:05,479
and I want to know why people
were saying that you lost. Well,

1733
02:26:05,479 --> 02:26:09,079
the only people who thought that were
his idiot followers who don't even know

1734
02:26:09,159 --> 02:26:13,559
what justification is. So, as
you can imagine, if I'm debating a

1735
02:26:13,959 --> 02:26:20,559
super low tier libertarian who's literally sitting
there drinking like four loco and getting drunk

1736
02:26:20,639 --> 02:26:24,360
and burping in the middle of the
debate, and I just said, are

1737
02:26:24,440 --> 02:26:28,159
you gonna give an account for why
I should believe or why you're telling me

1738
02:26:28,200 --> 02:26:31,280
the nap is true? And you
just sit there burps, half drunk.

1739
02:26:31,399 --> 02:26:35,639
I leave. So that's the quality
and level of idiocy that you're dealing with.

1740
02:26:37,399 --> 02:26:41,879
A hutch eighty nine three dollars.
Are there any sex in the anti

1741
02:26:41,000 --> 02:26:46,040
Nicing Fathers to talk about the personhood
of the Holy Spirit? Yeah? Absolutely.

1742
02:26:46,120 --> 02:26:48,879
In fact, we did a three
hour, no two hour discussion with

1743
02:26:50,280 --> 02:26:58,600
inspiring philosophy, just on trinitarian text
in the pre Nicene Fathers. So let's

1744
02:26:58,639 --> 02:27:09,559
see, let me pull that up
off the top of my head. I

1745
02:27:09,600 --> 02:27:16,760
don't remember exactly which text has specifically
the Holy Spirit there are they are there,

1746
02:27:18,879 --> 02:27:24,840
but we went through a whole bunch
of them. Did the early Church

1747
02:27:24,959 --> 02:27:33,280
teach the Trinity right here? So
this is specifically and we did this because

1748
02:27:33,479 --> 02:27:41,600
Jake made this really low tier argument
that hour and twenty minutes, and we

1749
02:27:41,760 --> 02:27:48,840
focused on pretty nice seeing stuff.
So Jake and Daniel Pikachu went on Patrick

1750
02:27:48,879 --> 02:27:54,559
Bette David. They said that the
Trinity was invented at Nicey or whatever,

1751
02:27:54,719 --> 02:28:01,840
stupid nonsense, like literally like the
dumbest Muslim are. So we went through

1752
02:28:03,079 --> 02:28:05,200
this is just the ones that I
found translated. So you understand a lot

1753
02:28:05,239 --> 02:28:13,959
of this texts. A lot of
this stuff isn't even necessarily translated. So

1754
02:28:13,079 --> 02:28:18,280
I think we started with maybe this
is talking about Turtullian just because Tartullium was

1755
02:28:18,319 --> 02:28:22,440
something that Jake brought up. We
didn't start with we didn't. We also

1756
02:28:22,520 --> 02:28:28,680
went back and went earlier to some
of the post Apostolic post Abasolic fathers that

1757
02:28:28,840 --> 02:28:33,600
mentioned this. I'm just trying to
find some of my references to see if

1758
02:28:33,639 --> 02:28:43,360
I could find one that specifically mentions
the spirit late two hundreds, and you'll

1759
02:28:43,440 --> 02:28:48,600
notice that he talks about the unbelief
of Jews and gentle els, and then

1760
02:28:48,680 --> 02:28:52,239
he says that exodustry, I am
God, there is none beside me.

1761
02:28:52,440 --> 02:28:56,159
You shall worship no other God.
And then he says, if you are

1762
02:28:58,360 --> 02:29:03,239
getting the two Hungers was saying,
Alexander of Alexandria, now Alexander in the

1763
02:29:03,280 --> 02:29:07,600
two hundreds. That then, this
is believed to have been written anywhere from

1764
02:29:07,879 --> 02:29:16,559
between seventy two hundred and the bishopric
the Apostolic succession. What do we say

1765
02:29:16,600 --> 02:29:20,639
in the foss Hilaro. Here's one. There's a reference to the Holy Spirit

1766
02:29:20,760 --> 02:29:26,479
right here. They think of themselves
wiser than the Holy Spirit. Is this

1767
02:29:26,600 --> 02:29:41,600
the Miratorian fragment? Maybe? Yeah? Oh, by the way, I

1768
02:29:41,680 --> 02:29:48,600
mean Chertollian. Tertollian argues for like
against Proxius right when he's arking to get

1769
02:29:48,680 --> 02:29:52,879
modalism. That would be another reference. Here's one right, here's the Holy

1770
02:29:52,959 --> 02:30:01,840
Spirit, Here's the Trinity. Let's
see who this is, cry Nation.

1771
02:30:01,680 --> 02:30:05,959
So although his terminology is a perception
of the Holy Spirit. So here you

1772
02:30:07,079 --> 02:30:13,799
have again trinitarian confession from Pope Dionysius
of Rome. So here's an early one

1773
02:30:13,879 --> 02:30:16,639
from Pope Dionysius. Next one.
This one is a little weird, but

1774
02:30:16,680 --> 02:30:22,680
I'm including it because it could pretend
you could possibly read it in a correct

1775
02:30:22,719 --> 02:30:28,399
way. It is is also possible
that it might be read in a heterodox

1776
02:30:28,520 --> 02:30:33,159
way because the lank is a little
ambiguous, but I'm including it just because

1777
02:30:33,200 --> 02:30:37,399
it is an early reference in the
Shepherd of Hermas. Okay, Shepherd of

1778
02:30:37,440 --> 02:30:41,440
Hermas has a reference of God in
time and space, particularly the second person

1779
02:30:41,520 --> 02:30:43,239
of God is So we don't think
that it's you know, the person to

1780
02:30:43,760 --> 02:30:52,559
be here, we go Holy Spirit, baptism and Holy the Son of the

1781
02:30:52,600 --> 02:30:58,159
Holy Spirit. Who is this pomonly
on on not Theophany is really making the

1782
02:31:00,319 --> 02:31:05,120
least early divinity to the sun becoming
a carna. But also be triadic and

1783
02:31:05,200 --> 02:31:22,319
fashion that the Holy Spirit is necessary
when we bout and apologists also was a

1784
02:31:22,399 --> 02:31:24,239
contrast. Oh, hypologists are rom
Okay, here's another go. So there's

1785
02:31:24,239 --> 02:31:30,159
a bunch of these here you go. Now, by the way, keep

1786
02:31:30,200 --> 02:31:35,399
in mind that the New Testament many
times over talks about the deity of the

1787
02:31:35,440 --> 02:31:41,159
Holy Spirit. So it's not like
we only know this from post You know,

1788
02:31:41,440 --> 02:31:46,559
Apostolic Church fathers that that the person
of the Spirit is the Holy Spirit

1789
02:31:46,559 --> 02:31:50,799
is a fully divine and a divine
person. I mean it's literally John fourteen

1790
02:31:50,959 --> 02:31:56,200
to seventeen, right a code.
I'm sorry, go ahead, are either,

1791
02:31:58,120 --> 02:32:03,200
Yeah, what's on your mind?
I was gonna ask a questions.

1792
02:32:03,079 --> 02:32:09,120
It was it was then like the
topic you're you're talking to, I think

1793
02:32:09,159 --> 02:32:13,440
it was like or the dogs Protestants
basically in the Exodus and the burning bush,

1794
02:32:16,159 --> 02:32:18,360
just like to just make sure,
like I don't have like a heterodog's

1795
02:32:18,479 --> 02:32:24,000
view, like is the burning bush? Is it kind of like one?

1796
02:32:24,159 --> 02:32:30,799
Is it a what was the word? Like a type of the word like

1797
02:32:30,879 --> 02:32:33,959
type of fart like kind of representing
an example of something of the tale tocos?

1798
02:32:35,319 --> 02:32:37,639
Yeah, it is, it is. It is spoken of and used

1799
02:32:37,680 --> 02:32:43,159
as a type of the te tokos
because she has within her the divine person

1800
02:32:43,200 --> 02:32:48,399
of the Sun, and yet she's
not consumed by his divinity. So yes,

1801
02:32:48,559 --> 02:32:52,040
but it's also a theophany because it's
Jesus there, you know, speaking

1802
02:32:52,159 --> 02:32:58,319
saying exactly And then that that for
me when I was just looking into it,

1803
02:32:58,440 --> 02:33:03,440
like that kind of has something to
do with like relics too, like

1804
02:33:03,600 --> 02:33:09,440
how like God sanctifies around him,
correct, And that's kind of how like

1805
02:33:09,000 --> 02:33:13,159
with the relics, they're wholly under
sanctified and the case. Yeah, uh,

1806
02:33:13,600 --> 02:33:20,959
the idea that the divine energies permeate
created matter is precisely the basis for

1807
02:33:20,040 --> 02:33:24,959
relics. Absolutely, I don't it
doesn't really make sense to believe in relics

1808
02:33:24,120 --> 02:33:26,760
if you don't believe in the doctrine
of the energies either. By the way,

1809
02:33:28,319 --> 02:33:45,760
great points ian Ian, No serros, you gotta unmute Ian. You

1810
02:33:45,760 --> 02:34:09,799
want to umute Ian? Are you
there? George? Okay, hey,

1811
02:34:09,879 --> 02:34:16,959
j Hey, So, something I
had been thinking about since you were connecting

1812
02:34:16,000 --> 02:34:24,000
the dots from the medieval saints quote
unquote to now and then like emotionalism that's

1813
02:34:24,159 --> 02:34:28,639
been uh, you know, led
to you in Protestantism, like they kind

1814
02:34:28,680 --> 02:34:33,360
of went full circle because now they're
they're full on embracing this like charismatic revival

1815
02:34:33,440 --> 02:34:39,159
thing where they have nuns like being
slain in the spirit and having like yeah,

1816
02:34:39,239 --> 02:34:41,920
no, the papacy has fully approved
of and accepted the charismatic movement.

1817
02:34:43,959 --> 02:34:43,760
Yeah, and so