WEBVTT

1
00:01:56.519 --> 00:02:00.239
Hey, everybody, to anyone debating
trinity versus talie. And we were starting

2
00:02:00.519 --> 00:02:05.719
right now with Jake Muslim metaphysician's opening
statement. Thanks so much for being with

3
00:02:05.799 --> 00:02:09.759
us. Jake, the floor is
all yours, all right, Are you

4
00:02:09.840 --> 00:02:17.800
able to see my screen there?
Yes? Okay, ready, all right?

5
00:02:17.840 --> 00:02:30.240
Bis mile Roman raheem alhamdhi, So
i'm abad arakatu. Welcome everyone.

6
00:02:30.400 --> 00:02:36.240
So the debate before us tonight is
the Orthodox Trinity versus ethity Creed. To

7
00:02:36.319 --> 00:02:39.919
be clear, this is a debate
over polytheism and the belief in three gods

8
00:02:39.919 --> 00:02:44.159
on the one hand, and monotheism, or the belief in one God,

9
00:02:44.280 --> 00:02:46.639
on the other hand. In the
first half of my opening statement, I

10
00:02:46.680 --> 00:02:51.520
will explain and offer a defensive ethnity
creed. In the second half of my

11
00:02:51.599 --> 00:02:54.840
statement, I will explain what the
Orthodox concept that the Trinity is and offer

12
00:02:54.960 --> 00:03:00.919
arguments against this position. First and
foremost, unlike Orthodox Christians, we Muslims

13
00:03:00.960 --> 00:03:09.639
believe in one God, ahed Allah
who summoned le Ahed say he a law

14
00:03:09.759 --> 00:03:15.159
is one Allah, the eternal,
the self sufficient. He neither begets,

15
00:03:15.159 --> 00:03:19.240
nor is he begotten, nor is
there to him any equivalent. Allah is

16
00:03:19.319 --> 00:03:23.439
one God, does not rely on
anything other than himself, and everything in

17
00:03:23.520 --> 00:03:28.159
creation relies upon him. He does
not beget, nor is he begotten or

18
00:03:28.240 --> 00:03:31.800
cause to exist, and there is
nothing equal to him. The great ethity

19
00:03:31.879 --> 00:03:38.000
scholar Ibn Koseima summarizes ethity creed,
saying, and I quote our doctrine or

20
00:03:38.039 --> 00:03:40.719
Medheb, as well as that of
all of our teachers, is as follows.

21
00:03:42.080 --> 00:03:46.039
We ascribe to God everything that he
ascribes to himself. We acknowledge it

22
00:03:46.120 --> 00:03:50.599
verbally and hold it to be true
through innerconviction within ourselves, though without thereby

23
00:03:50.680 --> 00:03:54.080
comparing God's face to the face of
any creature or created entity. For our

24
00:03:54.240 --> 00:04:00.520
Lord is above being like onto creatures. So we affirm real attributes for Allah

25
00:04:00.800 --> 00:04:03.680
based on the apparent meaning of the
texts, and ascribe to him what he

26
00:04:03.719 --> 00:04:08.879
ascribes to himself. We know the
meaning of his attributes, but we do

27
00:04:08.919 --> 00:04:12.960
not know the hakika or the kathia, or the precise reality of the attributes.

28
00:04:13.319 --> 00:04:15.399
Keep in mind that when we say
we affirm the apparent meaning of the

29
00:04:15.439 --> 00:04:20.399
text, this takes into account the
surrounding context of the verses mentioned, as

30
00:04:20.399 --> 00:04:25.759
well as the entire corpus of revelation. We do not deny his attributes,

31
00:04:26.079 --> 00:04:30.800
nor do we liken his attributes to
the creation. We reject divine simplicity or

32
00:04:30.800 --> 00:04:34.360
the notion that God does not have
any real distinct attributes. However, his

33
00:04:34.519 --> 00:04:40.199
attributes are inseparable from his essence.
He is not composed or caused to exist

34
00:04:40.279 --> 00:04:44.879
by something outside of himself. We
also affirm that a law is an active,

35
00:04:45.279 --> 00:04:49.720
dynamic creator that is genuinely capable of
acting in succession. He creates different

36
00:04:49.720 --> 00:04:55.160
things at different times and speaks to
his creation whatever he wills by his will

37
00:04:55.240 --> 00:04:59.319
and power. We believe his actions
can have a beginning in time, and

38
00:04:59.439 --> 00:05:04.240
yet are o created. The legendary
scholar of hadith Imame Albuchharti states, and

39
00:05:04.279 --> 00:05:11.399
I quote fulfit little Lahi syphithal Lahi
well merolu rero hum Menelchalki. So a

40
00:05:11.480 --> 00:05:15.639
Llaw's action is his attribute, and
that which is acted upon is distinct from

41
00:05:15.720 --> 00:05:20.800
him, being part of his creation. He also says his occurrences exalted be

42
00:05:20.879 --> 00:05:25.680
He are not similar to the occurrences
of creatures. According to the saying of

43
00:05:25.720 --> 00:05:29.680
a Law, most high lesa commit
hiche, there is nothing like him,

44
00:05:29.759 --> 00:05:33.600
and he is the hearing the scene. Lastly, Albukharti states that a law's

45
00:05:33.600 --> 00:05:38.720
command, which has a beginning in
time, is uncreated. So as we

46
00:05:38.800 --> 00:05:43.600
can see, Albuharti affirms that Allaw's
actions are his attributes, and they are

47
00:05:43.600 --> 00:05:46.839
distinct from creation. His actions also
can have a beginning in time, and

48
00:05:46.920 --> 00:05:51.800
yet they are uncreated. Some may
argue that we ethites affirm that a law

49
00:05:51.839 --> 00:05:57.000
has a hand and thereby liken him
to creation. They may claim that we

50
00:05:57.040 --> 00:06:01.399
cannot attribute the same name to God
in creation without ascribing the same ontology for

51
00:06:01.439 --> 00:06:06.639
God and Creation. This principle is
falsified if one affirms God and humans can

52
00:06:06.680 --> 00:06:13.120
possess an essence without being similar ontologically. The same bears true for every other

53
00:06:13.160 --> 00:06:17.439
predicate given to God. Also looming
behind the charge of Teeshbee is an assumed

54
00:06:17.480 --> 00:06:23.959
realism regarding universals. For example,
God and humans both have knowledge. This

55
00:06:24.120 --> 00:06:29.120
universal knowledge must be partially identical in
God and man, the objector assumes.

56
00:06:29.959 --> 00:06:33.399
However, if we reject the realist
notion, this argument assumes we cannot affirm

57
00:06:33.439 --> 00:06:39.839
the conclusion of Teeshbe. There is
no ontological sharing between God and Creation.

58
00:06:40.240 --> 00:06:46.319
Because ontological sharing does not exist.
Every object, including its essence and attributes

59
00:06:46.560 --> 00:06:50.959
is particular and not universal. Universals
merely exist as concepts in the mind.

60
00:06:53.120 --> 00:07:00.120
The claim that Ethity traditionalists represent an
overtly anthropomorphic theology has been refuted countless times,

61
00:07:00.360 --> 00:07:02.959
and most recently by Farid suli Man
when he states, and I quote

62
00:07:03.319 --> 00:07:08.959
Wesley Williams attempted in a two thousand
and two article to show that Ibin Hanbel's

63
00:07:08.959 --> 00:07:15.000
conception of God was blatantly anthropomorphic,
an untenable claim in my opinion close quote.

64
00:07:15.199 --> 00:07:19.680
Suleiman also cites numerous other academics who
have refuted this falsehood and goes into

65
00:07:19.720 --> 00:07:25.920
more detail substantiating his claim. We
should also keep in mind that Jay and

66
00:07:25.959 --> 00:07:30.399
the Eastern Orthodox have no problem with
Teeshbe. In fact, they consider it

67
00:07:30.519 --> 00:07:34.639
necessary given their concept of theosis described
by maximistic Confessor as in I quote,

68
00:07:35.120 --> 00:07:40.920
A sure warrant for looking forward with
hope to deification of human nature is provided

69
00:07:40.920 --> 00:07:45.560
by the incarnation of God, which
makes God, hence God, which makes

70
00:07:45.639 --> 00:07:49.879
man God to the same degree as
God himself became Man. Let us become

71
00:07:49.920 --> 00:07:56.240
the image of the whole one God, bearing nothing earthly in ourselves, so

72
00:07:56.279 --> 00:08:01.560
that we may consort with God and
become God's receiving from God our existence as

73
00:08:01.639 --> 00:08:07.000
gods. Close quote. So,
as we can see, Orthodox Christians do

74
00:08:07.040 --> 00:08:11.480
not have a problem likening God to
Creation or Creation to God. I now

75
00:08:11.519 --> 00:08:16.000
turn to my opponent's theology of the
trinity. I will argue that Jay believes

76
00:08:16.000 --> 00:08:20.759
in three gods based on what is
known in the literature as the logical problem

77
00:08:20.759 --> 00:08:24.040
of the Trinity. To put it
simply, the Father, the Son,

78
00:08:24.120 --> 00:08:26.600
and the Holy Spirit are each God, but are distinct from one another.

79
00:08:28.000 --> 00:08:31.759
The normal method by which we would
count would mean that there are three gods.

80
00:08:31.120 --> 00:08:35.200
Eastern Orthodox scholar Bo Branson states,
and I quote, the doctrine of

81
00:08:35.200 --> 00:08:39.360
the trinity is central to mainstream Christianity, but in so far as it posits

82
00:08:39.440 --> 00:08:43.159
three persons, Father, Son,
and Holy Spirit who are one God,

83
00:08:43.200 --> 00:08:48.559
it appears as inconsistent as the claim
that one plus one plus one equals one.

84
00:08:50.120 --> 00:08:54.720
So the common so called Muslim meme
of one plus one plus one is

85
00:08:54.840 --> 00:08:58.039
right on target. I expect Jay
to attempt to reply to this argument,

86
00:08:58.240 --> 00:09:01.840
but as we will see later,
his responses will not help him and will

87
00:09:01.840 --> 00:09:07.799
only create further difficulties. My second
argument is that the Father, Son,

88
00:09:07.840 --> 00:09:11.399
and Holy Spirit cannot be one God
because they do not possess the same power

89
00:09:11.480 --> 00:09:16.759
and knowledge. Orthodox Christians claim the
Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are

90
00:09:16.840 --> 00:09:20.799
one God because they possess the same
energies. However, power and knowledge are

91
00:09:20.960 --> 00:09:24.840
energies, and they do not possess
the same power and knowledge. For any

92
00:09:24.919 --> 00:09:28.679
power or knowledge that they do not
share. They make an exception to this

93
00:09:28.799 --> 00:09:33.879
so called rule in an unprincipled manner. For example, the Father alone has

94
00:09:33.919 --> 00:09:39.039
the power or ability to produce or
cause another divine person to exist. According

95
00:09:39.039 --> 00:09:43.440
to Jay, the Father alone causes
the Son and Spirit. They cannot have

96
00:09:43.519 --> 00:09:48.519
the same power if one divine person
has a power that the other two lack.

97
00:09:48.919 --> 00:09:52.440
Therefore they cannot be the same God. If they do not have the

98
00:09:52.480 --> 00:09:56.200
same power. The Father, Son, and Holy Spirit also do not have

99
00:09:56.240 --> 00:10:00.720
the same knowledge. The Father alone
knows that he has the power to cause

100
00:10:00.720 --> 00:10:03.879
the Sun and Spirit to exist.
The Son alone knows from a first person

101
00:10:03.960 --> 00:10:07.720
perspective that he is the Word who
became flesh, was born, and died

102
00:10:07.759 --> 00:10:11.799
on the cross. Therefore, they
cannot have the same knowledge. If they

103
00:10:11.840 --> 00:10:16.120
do not have the same knowledge,
then they must be three gods according to

104
00:10:16.200 --> 00:10:24.159
Jay's own standards. My third argument
is called the epistemological schizophrenia of Orthodoxy.

105
00:10:24.639 --> 00:10:30.720
Jay and the so called Orthobros make
a transcendental argument claiming that orthodox theology is

106
00:10:30.759 --> 00:10:37.159
a necessary precondition for knowledge logic,
argumentation, etc. What exactly is the

107
00:10:37.279 --> 00:10:43.320
argument or justification for this claim.
Now here's where the epistemological schizophrenia of Orthodoxy

108
00:10:43.559 --> 00:10:48.240
comes into focus. Jay's good friend
Anoniosaurum states, and I quote, obtaining

109
00:10:48.279 --> 00:10:56.600
the necessary conditions for the possibility of
knowledge cannot be logically or epistemically contingent upon

110
00:10:56.679 --> 00:11:01.879
logic or epistemological arguments, since this
would result than question begging an amount to

111
00:11:01.919 --> 00:11:07.120
epistemic bootstrapping. Neither would the veracity
of the claim that such and such conditions

112
00:11:07.159 --> 00:11:13.120
are necessary for the possibility of knowledge. The necessary conditions that would provide justification

113
00:11:13.279 --> 00:11:20.120
for our knowledge must be both metaphysically
and epistemically prior to epistemology and arguments close

114
00:11:20.240 --> 00:11:26.000
quote. It seems the response that
is that there is no argument or justification

115
00:11:26.320 --> 00:11:31.840
for the claim that orthodox theology is
a necessary precondition. However, in the

116
00:11:31.879 --> 00:11:37.039
same article, Anoniosaurum contradicts himself,
stating, and I quote, therefore,

117
00:11:37.279 --> 00:11:41.799
the only condition that will satisfy the
possibility of knowledge and bridged a gulf between

118
00:11:41.879 --> 00:11:48.600
man and truth is the unique idea
of God coherently articulated in the theology of

119
00:11:48.639 --> 00:11:52.440
the Eastern Orthodox Church, who has
preserved the correct doctrine of God received in

120
00:11:52.519 --> 00:11:58.240
divine revelation from the Holy Trinity.
For only in the Orthodox doctrine of God

121
00:11:58.440 --> 00:12:03.240
will we see that God the necessary
condition is rational, omniscient, transcendent,

122
00:12:03.559 --> 00:12:09.399
non contingent, or necessary, intentional
in his creation, as opposed to creation

123
00:12:09.559 --> 00:12:16.120
being accidental. A personal and communal
being having paracereesis within his trinity close quote.

124
00:12:16.360 --> 00:12:20.080
And he continues on listing all of
the reasons why the Eastern Orthodox Church

125
00:12:20.200 --> 00:12:26.080
alone can serve as the necessary precondition. He contradicts himself again just a few

126
00:12:26.120 --> 00:12:31.440
sentences later, saying, and I
quote. In presupposing God as the necessary

127
00:12:31.480 --> 00:12:35.600
condition for the possibility of knowledge,
man surrenders his autonomy to the revelation of

128
00:12:35.600 --> 00:12:41.279
God, not as a conclusion that
has met the standards of his epistemological criterion

129
00:12:41.519 --> 00:12:46.480
itself close quote. So which one
is it? Does Jay and have an

130
00:12:46.600 --> 00:12:52.159
argument and justification for the claim that
Orthodox theology is the necessary precondition for knowledge

131
00:12:52.200 --> 00:12:58.080
and argumentation And if so, then
what exactly is the argument? If not,

132
00:12:58.440 --> 00:13:01.200
then the claim is equivalent to stay
eating that a banana is the necessary

133
00:13:01.240 --> 00:13:05.639
precondition for knowledge and argumentation. And
when you ask me to justify that,

134
00:13:07.080 --> 00:13:11.039
I can simply say that you are
missing the whole point, as this argument

135
00:13:11.159 --> 00:13:16.320
is beyond justification. Let's see which
direction Jay goes and if he can remove

136
00:13:16.399 --> 00:13:22.279
himself from this state of epistemic schizophrenia. My final argument is what I call

137
00:13:22.360 --> 00:13:26.840
the problem of orthodoxy in Orthodoxy.
By this, I mean that early church

138
00:13:26.879 --> 00:13:31.679
Fathers and saints and Jay's tradition rejected
the doctrine of the Trinity. Jay denies

139
00:13:31.720 --> 00:13:35.639
this and claims that not only were
the early church Father's trinitarians, but so

140
00:13:35.759 --> 00:13:39.480
were ancient Jews. He cites authors
like Alan Siegel, Daniel Boyoran, and

141
00:13:39.559 --> 00:13:43.399
others to support his claim. However, he does so either out of complete

142
00:13:43.480 --> 00:13:48.240
ignorance or does so dishonestly. These
scholars simply point out that there were intra

143
00:13:48.360 --> 00:13:54.559
Jewish theological disputes regarding how one should
interpret certain texts. Some Jews interpreted passages

144
00:13:54.559 --> 00:14:00.360
in the Old Testament and support of
a theology similar to logos theology, where

145
00:14:00.360 --> 00:14:05.120
the logos is a divine or semi
divine figure that serves as an intermediary between

146
00:14:05.200 --> 00:14:09.600
the Most High God and creation.
Boy or In quotes Daniel Abrams saying,

147
00:14:09.639 --> 00:14:13.720
and I quote, no one view
dominated the spectrum of Jewish interpretations, since

148
00:14:13.759 --> 00:14:18.440
the Biblical text is the only common
frame for the wide variety of speculations close

149
00:14:18.519 --> 00:14:22.840
quote. So logos theology was not
the only view, or even the dominant

150
00:14:22.879 --> 00:14:28.360
view in early Judaism. Also,
these same sources Jay loves to quote represent

151
00:14:28.600 --> 00:14:33.799
Justin Martyr as a proponent of logos
theology and not trinitarianism. Boy Orin against

152
00:14:33.799 --> 00:14:39.519
states, and I quote many of
these passages served as the origin and proof

153
00:14:39.600 --> 00:14:46.919
text for logos theology, as manifested
in Justin Martyr's Dialogue on nearly every page.

154
00:14:46.240 --> 00:14:52.320
Close quote. Alan Siegel states,
and I quote both Christianity and Gnosticism

155
00:14:52.600 --> 00:14:58.559
arose out of Hellenistic and apocalyptic Judaism
by sharing heretical traditions of scripture interpretation,

156
00:14:58.759 --> 00:15:05.080
which speculated on a principal angelic mediator
of God. Close quote. This is

157
00:15:05.200 --> 00:15:11.399
exactly what I've always claimed, Leslie. Boy Orin acknowledges the stark difference between

158
00:15:11.480 --> 00:15:18.080
logos theology and trinitarianism. Saying,
and I quote. Nicene Orthodoxy also effectively

159
00:15:18.240 --> 00:15:22.759
crucifies the logos, while not ceasing
to be to speak of the logos.

160
00:15:22.960 --> 00:15:28.000
In the move to a Trinitarian theology, within which the entire Trinity is both

161
00:15:28.039 --> 00:15:33.360
self contained and fully transcendent, Athanasius
and his fellows insist that God alone,

162
00:15:33.639 --> 00:15:37.879
without a mediator, without an angel, without a logos, is the creator.

163
00:15:37.200 --> 00:15:45.960
Logos theology is ultimately as thoroughly rejected
within Nicene Christianity as within Orthodox Ribbinism.

164
00:15:46.320 --> 00:15:52.039
Quotes quote so logos theology. So
some Jews were Logosterists and others were

165
00:15:52.080 --> 00:15:56.360
not. However none of them were
Trinitarians. Also, some early Christians were

166
00:15:56.360 --> 00:16:02.320
Logosterists and some were not. Justin
Martyr and other church fathers were logos theorists,

167
00:16:02.559 --> 00:16:07.720
but logos theory is deemed heretical by
Orthodox Trinitarians. Jay and his Orthodox

168
00:16:07.799 --> 00:16:12.600
friends pray to dead saints who held
heretical positions and did not believe Jesus was

169
00:16:12.639 --> 00:16:18.039
the most high God. It seems
like Orthodoxy has a problem with Orthodoxy.

170
00:16:18.559 --> 00:16:22.759
In conclusion, Ethitic creed is the
belief in one God who is the creator

171
00:16:22.799 --> 00:16:26.039
of all. As for Jay and
the Orthodox Christians, who suffer from epistemic

172
00:16:26.120 --> 00:16:32.080
schizophrenia. I argue that they believe
in three gods, the fathers, the

173
00:16:32.120 --> 00:16:36.240
Father, Son and Spirit do not
have the same power or knowledge, rendering

174
00:16:36.320 --> 00:16:41.080
them three gods. And lastly,
they have a problem with Orthodoxy, as

175
00:16:41.120 --> 00:16:47.080
their early church fathers held to a
heretical theology by their own standards. Be

176
00:16:47.399 --> 00:16:57.360
nakailht wellmulwelutosifun. Thank you very much, and I look forward to Jay's presentation.

177
00:17:00.360 --> 00:17:03.279
Thank you very much for that opening. And folks, if it's your

178
00:17:03.320 --> 00:17:06.960
first time here at Modern Day Debate, want to let you know we're thrilled

179
00:17:07.000 --> 00:17:10.359
to have you here. We hope
you feel welcome, and don't forget to

180
00:17:10.400 --> 00:17:14.240
hit that subscribe button as we have
many debates coming up. You don't want

181
00:17:14.279 --> 00:17:17.440
to miss them, so hit subscribe
right now. We're gonna kick it over

182
00:17:17.440 --> 00:17:19.599
to j for his opening as well. Thanks for being with us. Jay,

183
00:17:19.599 --> 00:17:23.920
the floors all yours for your opening
statement. All right, can we

184
00:17:23.960 --> 00:17:29.359
see the screen? Yes, all
right, let's get into it. So

185
00:17:30.319 --> 00:17:33.720
I I'm glad for Jake. They're
basically doing everything I wanted him to do

186
00:17:34.319 --> 00:17:37.640
in his opening statement. So he's
handing me a lot of gems, and

187
00:17:37.680 --> 00:17:41.599
it's going to jie perfectly with what
I put in my opening statement as to

188
00:17:41.799 --> 00:17:47.519
exactly where I knew he would go. So let's talk about Salafi Islamic absurdity.

189
00:17:47.559 --> 00:17:51.960
And that's of course the position that
Jake represents here. And uh,

190
00:17:52.000 --> 00:17:59.039
we're going to look first at how
one of his representative theologians that he said

191
00:17:59.079 --> 00:18:03.880
represents the powers of Islam. Even
to me, particularly in his book on

192
00:18:03.920 --> 00:18:07.519
the Oneness of God, we're going
to know that it's a massive Christian fail

193
00:18:07.559 --> 00:18:11.200
and we're going to see the similar
fails that even to mea makes an understanding

194
00:18:11.240 --> 00:18:15.359
Christian theology basics the Jake himself made
when it came to the triad, by

195
00:18:15.400 --> 00:18:19.839
example, for example, by reducing
the idea of begetting to being an energy.

196
00:18:19.880 --> 00:18:23.440
Begetting is not an energy. So
for Jake's argument to hold that he

197
00:18:23.480 --> 00:18:26.720
made earlier about the Triad, begetting
would have to be a common energy.

198
00:18:26.720 --> 00:18:30.000
And it's not, first of all, even to me a pousitis at the

199
00:18:30.039 --> 00:18:37.359
outset of his book an eternal world
existing eternally separate from God based on an

200
00:18:37.440 --> 00:18:41.640
infinite regress of worlds now, Jake
has made many critiques of this view and

201
00:18:41.680 --> 00:18:45.279
others. So it'd be interesting to
see if he rejects a basic idea in

202
00:18:45.319 --> 00:18:51.480
one of his basic palamas like theologians
of the Islami tradition. Second is,

203
00:18:51.759 --> 00:18:56.039
even to mea pauses the Trinity as
contradicting natural reason. This is a problem

204
00:18:56.079 --> 00:18:59.279
they're going to notice later on in
even to me as well as Jake,

205
00:18:59.400 --> 00:19:02.880
given the that he doesn't understand the
transcental argument, as he made clear in

206
00:19:02.920 --> 00:19:04.319
his opening statement, that's going to
be very relevant for where we go here

207
00:19:04.319 --> 00:19:08.400
in a minute. Arguing that the
Trinity makes energies and attributes persons is a

208
00:19:08.440 --> 00:19:12.119
move that Ibantimia makes, which is
false. He attributes to us the Nestorian

209
00:19:12.200 --> 00:19:17.079
view of christ Us to Hypostaces,
which is false. And he attributes to

210
00:19:17.119 --> 00:19:19.680
us an Arian motalist view of the
Trinity collapsing person and nature and God on

211
00:19:19.759 --> 00:19:25.559
pages twenty two to twenty four.
Now, he may not believe those things,

212
00:19:25.720 --> 00:19:27.960
and you may not believe those things, but that's not our position as

213
00:19:29.079 --> 00:19:30.960
Orthodox. So if we're going to
be arguing against the Orthodox position, you

214
00:19:32.000 --> 00:19:36.519
can't set up a strong man and
say that you're knocking down the Orthodox position

215
00:19:36.559 --> 00:19:41.480
when it's the Aryan or historian position
no s if Antonia, Clint and Islam

216
00:19:41.519 --> 00:19:45.960
in general fail to understand, typically
speaking, the Orthodox trinitarian dogma, and

217
00:19:47.000 --> 00:19:51.880
they create a strong man as a
formula as formulating in our councils, which

218
00:19:51.920 --> 00:19:56.000
reject arianism and Nestorianism. This would
be like me basically calling Jacob sufi,

219
00:19:56.079 --> 00:20:00.720
and then we're proceeding to refute that
position Jakes failed to ca out of unity

220
00:20:00.759 --> 00:20:03.559
and multiplicity in Allah. This has
come up in a few debates now with

221
00:20:03.759 --> 00:20:07.079
Jake. But what is being debated
here between us is not actually a pure

222
00:20:07.160 --> 00:20:12.440
unitarian position of Jake versus the freeness
position that I have, but rather two

223
00:20:12.519 --> 00:20:18.599
different ways of accounting for unity and
distinction in God. Jake would like to

224
00:20:18.599 --> 00:20:26.119
give the impression that his position is
free from all issues that relate to multiplicity,

225
00:20:26.400 --> 00:20:29.039
but in passion debates we will see
that this fails. Jake believes that

226
00:20:29.599 --> 00:20:33.279
the attributes of God are according to
even to me, as two principles really

227
00:20:33.279 --> 00:20:37.359
distinct amongst themselves from God's essence.
What applies to one attribute also applies to

228
00:20:37.400 --> 00:20:41.440
all the others, and equally to
God's essence. This includes affirmation and negation

229
00:20:41.839 --> 00:20:45.000
true whether we know the meaning or
not accept the plain meaning. As Jake

230
00:20:45.079 --> 00:20:49.319
said in his opening statement, attributes
are comparable to creatures in terms of perfections,

231
00:20:51.079 --> 00:20:55.599
which creatures partially have, while God
maximally has this perfection in a way

232
00:20:55.640 --> 00:21:00.920
befitting him. Thus likeness in these
cases is quote in name only. According

233
00:21:00.920 --> 00:21:04.519
to Eman, to me Ergo,
it tells us nothing, especially with Jake's

234
00:21:06.240 --> 00:21:08.480
nominalist Imperis's position, which he admitted. We will look at this in a

235
00:21:08.480 --> 00:21:11.680
second, so keep that in mind. True for thee, not for me

236
00:21:11.799 --> 00:21:15.799
the Jake brand. Jake believes that
the attributes are really distinct and inseparable.

237
00:21:15.920 --> 00:21:19.119
Did you hear him say that in
his opening statement? That means counting by

238
00:21:19.279 --> 00:21:27.200
division, But he also distinctly identifies
the attributes is really distinct from each other

239
00:21:27.240 --> 00:21:32.960
and from the essence that's counting by
identity, which in the same boat places

240
00:21:33.000 --> 00:21:37.319
him in the same boat as trinitarians
when accounting for the distinction of hypostaces counted

241
00:21:37.359 --> 00:21:41.319
by identity and the divine essence counted
by division. No, I did not

242
00:21:41.440 --> 00:21:47.319
say that Jake thinks that allahs attributes
are persons, or that we think attributes

243
00:21:47.400 --> 00:21:52.039
our persons. That is Jake's strong
man that he often uses in many discussions

244
00:21:52.039 --> 00:21:56.519
and live streams when he attempts to
rebut this argument. But rather Jake makes

245
00:21:56.559 --> 00:22:00.720
the same move when accounting for unity
and distinction in God that we yet he

246
00:22:00.799 --> 00:22:03.880
calls us out on it. This
is in fact Jake's guilty double standard.

247
00:22:06.119 --> 00:22:10.119
Furthermore, Jake and even to me
are allowed to engage in affirmation claims about

248
00:22:10.119 --> 00:22:14.079
Allah, which we call catafatic theology
that he would call idolatry in Christianity.

249
00:22:14.160 --> 00:22:18.599
Jake often states the trinity incarnation's pagan
we look at examples in a moment.

250
00:22:18.680 --> 00:22:21.880
But this illustrates another double center,
where all of his body parts are considered

251
00:22:21.920 --> 00:22:26.359
real but not created, foot,
hand, eyes, et cetera. What

252
00:22:26.480 --> 00:22:30.960
is an uncreated foot that is nothing
like a human foot? What, by

253
00:22:30.000 --> 00:22:34.559
the way, is a more perfect
foot? Does the godfoot have toenails?

254
00:22:36.119 --> 00:22:40.400
Isn't a foot with toenails more perfect
than a toenail deficient foot? In other

255
00:22:40.400 --> 00:22:44.119
words, it tells us absolutely nothing, and it reduces to absurdity. Also,

256
00:22:44.200 --> 00:22:47.880
even to me, it argues that
God laughing is somehow more perfect than

257
00:22:47.960 --> 00:22:51.519
him not laughing. I'm interested to
see how Jake accounts for this. It

258
00:22:51.519 --> 00:22:56.240
would then follow the eternally laughing is
better than laughing once. So God is

259
00:22:56.319 --> 00:22:59.839
eternally lolling, In other words,
a clown God. Remember what applies to

260
00:23:00.000 --> 00:23:03.359
an attribute to me, as rules
applies to all the others. If there's

261
00:23:03.359 --> 00:23:07.400
an infinite series of created worlds and
causes, then why would we ever need

262
00:23:07.440 --> 00:23:12.400
a single being? Also a position
of even to meum contingent means dependent upon

263
00:23:12.519 --> 00:23:17.599
something else. But it's begging the
question to say that it's a single necessary

264
00:23:17.640 --> 00:23:19.680
being. So even to me,
I might catch this out or jake in

265
00:23:19.680 --> 00:23:23.880
two different ways. If it's a
causal relation, then he's engaged in the

266
00:23:23.920 --> 00:23:27.519
quantifier shift fallacy that every event has
a cause, and so that every event

267
00:23:27.599 --> 00:23:32.880
has one cause. If every event
is contingent such that there's a transference to

268
00:23:32.920 --> 00:23:36.200
the whole, that's the part's whole
fallacy, because if everything is contingent,

269
00:23:36.200 --> 00:23:38.680
therefore the whole is contingent is a
non sequitor. For example, my room

270
00:23:38.720 --> 00:23:42.119
is made up of atoms. Atoms
are invisible, therefore my room is invisible.

271
00:23:42.119 --> 00:23:45.319
This is a non sequitor. And
this relates to the two types of

272
00:23:45.400 --> 00:23:52.680
argumentation that even to me thinks is
rational argumentation for the existence of God created

273
00:23:52.720 --> 00:23:56.720
acts in God's essence. Jake is
quick to claim idolatry in our position,

274
00:23:56.759 --> 00:24:00.599
but holds actual idolatrists used by positing
actions in the essence of God unless he

275
00:24:00.640 --> 00:24:06.720
again departs from the guy that he
says is his palamox. So in Suleiman

276
00:24:06.759 --> 00:24:07.759
two forty one, they have been
to me in the attributes of God.

277
00:24:08.319 --> 00:24:11.799
We have this pointed out that,
in other words, temporal acts are contrasted

278
00:24:11.839 --> 00:24:15.519
with eternal acts. Jake makes this
argument himself and Jake make a character that

279
00:24:15.559 --> 00:24:21.039
creator acts are now eternal. That
is a contradiction and also creates an attribute

280
00:24:21.039 --> 00:24:25.640
that contradicts even to me as principal
number one of what is applied to one

281
00:24:25.680 --> 00:24:29.319
attribute that applies to all, meaning
that all the attributes are now created and

282
00:24:29.400 --> 00:24:33.759
temporal or timborrel acts are eternal.
It also violates it in principle having his

283
00:24:33.759 --> 00:24:40.559
principle number two, which applies to
the attributes in God's which applies which applies

284
00:24:40.680 --> 00:24:44.920
to the attributes applicable to God's essence, meaning that God's essence is now temporal.

285
00:24:45.319 --> 00:24:48.799
Idolatry will remind you of ascribing to
creatures of divine nature or worshiping creatures

286
00:24:48.839 --> 00:24:55.079
as God. This may also be
why Jake thinks God's knowledge has had through

287
00:24:55.079 --> 00:25:00.720
discursive propositions, and that's precisely why
he thinks the indexical's argument in debate from

288
00:25:00.799 --> 00:25:07.079
modern philosophy applies to his ideas of
God. I can simply reply that God's

289
00:25:07.519 --> 00:25:11.279
mode of knowledge is not equivalent to
creaturly modes of knowledge. And since Jake

290
00:25:11.920 --> 00:25:15.640
at will invoke the idea of we
don't know the modality, well, we

291
00:25:15.680 --> 00:25:21.079
don't know the modality of God's knowledge. But I also might just simply deny

292
00:25:21.119 --> 00:25:26.960
that God's knowledge is discursive or indexical. More problems for Jake, perfectly laughing.

293
00:25:27.119 --> 00:25:32.480
The attributes of all law considered in
themselves possess a sayety. This has

294
00:25:32.519 --> 00:25:36.039
been asked to Jake in the past, and of course Jake has not had

295
00:25:36.079 --> 00:25:38.839
an answer to it. Is one
answer, one attribute considered in itself less

296
00:25:38.839 --> 00:25:45.160
perfect than all of them compiled together, or all of them plus the essence.

297
00:25:45.839 --> 00:25:49.079
Remember, a lot of this theology
going to be built on perfect and

298
00:25:49.200 --> 00:25:52.559
less perfect metaphysical assumptions, and we're
going to see in a moment that he

299
00:25:52.599 --> 00:25:57.960
doesn't even have the ability to get
to predicating metaphysical claims at all. Why

300
00:25:59.079 --> 00:26:02.880
is laughing and turning his face quote
more perfect than not? And this is

301
00:26:02.920 --> 00:26:07.000
it's actually argued by ibn to Mea
in the book the Suliman Book. We

302
00:26:07.119 --> 00:26:11.559
might ask what is a more perfect
laugh? Was it a perfect laugh?

303
00:26:11.799 --> 00:26:15.799
Was it merely a snicker? Why
must we arbitrarily stop and inquiring about this

304
00:26:15.039 --> 00:26:18.359
meaning? If it's a they will
typically say, well, it's a laugh

305
00:26:18.400 --> 00:26:22.480
that befits the majesty of all law. This again tells us absolutely nothing,

306
00:26:22.920 --> 00:26:27.079
and in fact it's circular because it's
not telling us anything. It's just another

307
00:26:27.240 --> 00:26:32.599
supposed attribute that tells us that a
law is more perfect. So that's a

308
00:26:32.640 --> 00:26:37.640
circular claim, which even I to
me rejects circularity. If being is part

309
00:26:37.720 --> 00:26:41.200
of what it is seen, what
it is to be perfect, then God

310
00:26:41.279 --> 00:26:47.200
must be seen to be perfect.
Yet Tama says that God cannot be seen.

311
00:26:47.559 --> 00:26:51.039
Even Suleiman notes in the book on
even to Mea, page two fifty

312
00:26:51.039 --> 00:26:53.400
two, this is a flat out
contradiction. And again we're going to see

313
00:26:53.400 --> 00:26:59.599
tons and tons of contradictions when it
comes to basic ideas about predicating about God.

314
00:27:00.079 --> 00:27:04.680
What is the priori idea, by
the way, a metaphysical perfection?

315
00:27:04.720 --> 00:27:07.039
Here? Where does Jake derive it. How do we know this? Well?

316
00:27:07.079 --> 00:27:10.880
It turns out it gets even worse
because Jake, even to me,

317
00:27:10.960 --> 00:27:15.839
is epistemology, as he noted,
is an empiricist nominalist epistemology. Jake's position

318
00:27:15.839 --> 00:27:18.960
cannot get off the ground terms of
predication at all, and if this argument

319
00:27:18.039 --> 00:27:21.759
holds, all of his argumentation about
how he will then fail. This is

320
00:27:21.759 --> 00:27:25.920
because Jake has put his metaphysical cart
before his epistemic course and is engaging in

321
00:27:25.960 --> 00:27:30.480
a host of unjustified, arbitrary,
and contradictory claims. Empiricism is the view

322
00:27:30.480 --> 00:27:33.680
that knowledge arises from sense data or
relations of ideas. Nominalism is the view

323
00:27:33.680 --> 00:27:37.240
that universals have no real existence,
and for even to me and for Jake,

324
00:27:37.279 --> 00:27:42.359
they're purely mental and solely particular.
I Committed nominalists, however, must

325
00:27:42.400 --> 00:27:48.400
grapple with the following problems. There
is no empirical perception of quote necessity being

326
00:27:48.559 --> 00:27:52.119
caused, or any other metaphysical claim. This then undercuts all histeology and theology

327
00:27:52.119 --> 00:27:56.359
claims. There's no empirical perception of
the parapeticut axiom, the idea that what's

328
00:27:56.400 --> 00:28:00.279
in the mind derives from sense data. This is a position, and they've

329
00:28:00.279 --> 00:28:03.880
been to me a hold. There's
no empirical perception of quote reason or quote

330
00:28:03.880 --> 00:28:07.400
self evident truth. We note that
even to me affirms self evident truth as

331
00:28:07.440 --> 00:28:11.160
most as soon you do as well, and I assume Jake knows as well.

332
00:28:11.319 --> 00:28:15.480
There's no empirical perception of the universal
that is abstracted by the intellect through

333
00:28:15.480 --> 00:28:19.599
the phantasm. Some of the crib
from Aristotle also present in it. To

334
00:28:19.640 --> 00:28:25.519
me, the universal is thus not
a universal if it's only merely particulars.

335
00:28:25.519 --> 00:28:27.000
I forgot to put the footnote there, but I can add it. There's

336
00:28:27.039 --> 00:28:33.559
no empirical perception of quote perfection any
All the arguments that Hinge alice perfection on

337
00:28:33.279 --> 00:28:40.319
maximally creature like perfections also then fail. There's no empirical perception of identity over

338
00:28:40.359 --> 00:28:44.279
time. If you're an empiricist,
these arguments are arguing, and by extension,

339
00:28:44.279 --> 00:28:47.400
no perception then of meaning over time. In other words, I can

340
00:28:47.440 --> 00:28:51.839
just take human's critiques of identity over
time and apply them to Jake's position,

341
00:28:51.920 --> 00:28:56.720
which is a not consistent empiricism.
It turns out, actually David Hume's empiricism

342
00:28:56.799 --> 00:29:00.960
is way more consistent, and that's
why we can use these arguments. In

343
00:29:00.960 --> 00:29:06.079
fact, Jake might think this isn't
fair since this is a debate about talet

344
00:29:06.160 --> 00:29:08.119
and trinity. But again he brought
up a transcend augumentation, so I don't

345
00:29:08.119 --> 00:29:12.759
feel unfair now. But if all
this about predicating by the attributes is based

346
00:29:12.799 --> 00:29:17.839
on a faulty epistemology of not eve
empiricism and a faulty metaphysic of nominalism,

347
00:29:17.920 --> 00:29:22.160
then every sentagent Jake makes fails to
be justifiable or even coherent, as all

348
00:29:22.200 --> 00:29:29.160
predication itself is now impossible, much
less divine predication. Indeed, the Oxford

349
00:29:29.200 --> 00:29:33.519
hand Book of Islam even notes that
even to me is a Hume and a

350
00:29:33.559 --> 00:29:37.839
Locke before human luck. Thus,
as such he will be subjected to the

351
00:29:37.880 --> 00:29:41.240
exact same critiques that we make of
human lack. Even to me, a

352
00:29:41.279 --> 00:29:45.599
principles of reason are self evident.
On page one ninety six we're told it's

353
00:29:45.640 --> 00:29:48.079
even to me his view, and
I assume Jake's as well. It's a

354
00:29:48.119 --> 00:29:52.359
form of classical foundationalism, where the
first principles in terms of reasoning are self

355
00:29:52.400 --> 00:29:56.640
evident, of course evid to me, they require no justification. If this

356
00:29:56.720 --> 00:29:59.920
is the basis of his reasoning in
general and by extension of the theological reason

357
00:30:00.759 --> 00:30:04.279
of Quranic explanations. Then we see
no basis for this assertion. If Jake

358
00:30:04.279 --> 00:30:07.680
can be arbitrary, so can I. Jake. I can just claim that

359
00:30:07.759 --> 00:30:12.160
the transcendental argument requires no justification.
It just is the case. Now,

360
00:30:12.200 --> 00:30:17.599
I don't actually think that, and
I'm going to address your misunderstanding of the

361
00:30:17.680 --> 00:30:22.000
category error that you made between logical
and metalllogical argumentation, but that'll come later.

362
00:30:22.799 --> 00:30:27.240
What is the non self referential,
non circular basis for you, as

363
00:30:27.279 --> 00:30:30.759
a kind of foundationalist for thinking that
the principles of reasoning are self evident?

364
00:30:32.119 --> 00:30:36.240
What determines self evidence? If it's
based on something else else, then it's

365
00:30:36.240 --> 00:30:38.279
no longer self evident. If it's
not based on something else, then there's

366
00:30:38.359 --> 00:30:42.519
the problem of arbitrariness. Furthermore,
there's the criteria problem. What is the

367
00:30:42.519 --> 00:30:49.480
more fundamental principle by which you classify
self evidence from non self evident truth example,

368
00:30:51.200 --> 00:30:53.519
For example, it admits so many
passages that are disputed in the Koran

369
00:30:55.720 --> 00:30:59.319
in terms of their meaning. Yet
we're told that the plain simple meaning is

370
00:30:59.359 --> 00:31:03.319
accessible to all and becomes extremely complex. However, when we see even Temia

371
00:31:03.400 --> 00:31:08.720
layout four rules for knowing when it's
figured versus the plain meaning. Now,

372
00:31:08.839 --> 00:31:14.079
this you can see, was a
huge source of dispute between him and doctor

373
00:31:14.160 --> 00:31:18.799
Khalil in their debate where they were
trying to figure out between various chronic texts

374
00:31:18.799 --> 00:31:21.119
the pen, the tablet, this
that, the hand, the foot,

375
00:31:21.480 --> 00:31:25.799
what's literal, what's figurative? And
well, Jake says, look, we're

376
00:31:25.799 --> 00:31:29.400
going to go to the rules laid
out by my scholars. How do we

377
00:31:29.440 --> 00:31:32.359
know that those rules are the correct
rules? In other words, it's just

378
00:31:32.599 --> 00:31:36.200
moving the problem back a step.
Given that Jake rejects the incarnation as a

379
00:31:36.240 --> 00:31:38.519
pagan contradiction, we can return to
the body parts, which are clin clearly

380
00:31:38.559 --> 00:31:45.920
anthropomorphic attributes are claimed to have a
practical teaching of value that would be useful

381
00:31:45.920 --> 00:31:49.720
for seventh century Arabs and Jews,
or even Christians hearing the text. Yet

382
00:31:49.759 --> 00:31:55.480
the plain meaning is championed by Imantemia
and the Salafi. It's based on analogy

383
00:31:55.559 --> 00:32:00.359
or likeness. It's immediately divested of
all the meaning, making the statement empty

384
00:32:00.400 --> 00:32:04.319
and contradictor handfoot, face, laughter, above the throne, descent to lowis

385
00:32:04.319 --> 00:32:07.960
heavens are all quote affirmed and then
stated to be unknown in modality. In

386
00:32:08.000 --> 00:32:13.160
other words, the godfoot is a
foot that befits a llah, but it's

387
00:32:13.200 --> 00:32:16.839
nothing like a human foot. Even
Suleiman notes of even to me that he

388
00:32:16.960 --> 00:32:21.799
plainly contradicts himself here on body parts
on page three thirty one, as well

389
00:32:21.839 --> 00:32:24.519
as on the notion of creaturely and
divine perfections on page two fifty two.

390
00:32:24.839 --> 00:32:29.720
It is a hand that's unlike empirically
known hands, is basically what we're saying

391
00:32:29.759 --> 00:32:34.559
here. Yet we're expecting every person
in this century to just simply know that.

392
00:32:34.599 --> 00:32:37.559
Well, clearly it's not talking about
a creaturely hand, even though we

393
00:32:37.559 --> 00:32:43.119
are inmpiricists. So lastly, I
would note that the trinity is a doctrine

394
00:32:43.119 --> 00:32:45.440
that is not far fetched. Basil
and Letter two thirty four says the energies

395
00:32:45.440 --> 00:32:50.000
come down to us, and then
monarchicalternatarianism, which I think we'll get into.

396
00:32:50.119 --> 00:32:58.079
My time is running out, is
a combination of counting unity by division

397
00:32:58.079 --> 00:33:02.200
and identity. With that, I
want to say first thank you to both

398
00:33:02.240 --> 00:33:06.279
of our guests for those opening statements. Folks, you can find our guests

399
00:33:06.359 --> 00:33:09.039
link below. I have encourage even
if you don't agree with them. This

400
00:33:09.119 --> 00:33:15.400
is a great opportunity you can learn
their positions firsthand by checking out their links

401
00:33:15.440 --> 00:33:17.480
in the description box. Also,
I want to let you know for tonight

402
00:33:17.680 --> 00:33:21.440
we have a limited Q and A
as this debate is gonna be a pretty

403
00:33:21.480 --> 00:33:23.400
long one, so I want to
let you know for the Q and A,

404
00:33:23.480 --> 00:33:29.079
we won't get to every single question. We do want to ask one

405
00:33:29.359 --> 00:33:31.160
if you do a super chat,
we're going to read superchests that are five

406
00:33:31.200 --> 00:33:37.240
dollars or more. And if you
submit a question where it's not a superchat,

407
00:33:37.440 --> 00:33:38.680
just to standard question, we're gonna
try to get to those. But

408
00:33:38.759 --> 00:33:43.160
no promises because we do want to
let these guys out by a decent time

409
00:33:43.200 --> 00:33:45.920
tonight. But with that we're gonna
jump right into the rebuttals. Thank you

410
00:33:45.000 --> 00:33:50.599
very much for those openings, gentlemen, and Jake, the floor is all

411
00:33:50.640 --> 00:33:55.319
yours for your first ten minute rebuttal
okay, thank you very much. I

412
00:33:55.440 --> 00:34:00.240
just want to say at the outset, you know, Jay's opening statement was

413
00:34:00.359 --> 00:34:06.079
very interesting. He spent the entire
fifteen minutes attempting to attack my position,

414
00:34:06.279 --> 00:34:07.920
which I'm going to show in just
a second that he did a very poor

415
00:34:08.000 --> 00:34:13.440
job because he's so ignorant of our
position. He doesn't understand what we actually

416
00:34:13.480 --> 00:34:17.960
believe. Nevertheless, he barely went
through any detail during the fifteen minutes of

417
00:34:19.079 --> 00:34:23.760
explaining what orthodox theology is and what
that actually teaches. So the audience in

418
00:34:23.840 --> 00:34:28.239
myself, if I don't didn't have
these, you know, about fifty books

419
00:34:28.280 --> 00:34:31.639
of Orthodox theology, I wouldn't know
what the hell Jay's position actually is because

420
00:34:31.679 --> 00:34:37.199
he didn't go into any significant detail
to talk about his own position, whereas

421
00:34:37.280 --> 00:34:40.159
I did. I try to manage
my time to speak about half the time

422
00:34:40.239 --> 00:34:45.559
about my own position and half the
time about my opponents and critiquing his position.

423
00:34:46.320 --> 00:34:50.679
So I wish Jay would have spent
more time on his own position,

424
00:34:50.760 --> 00:34:54.360
but of course, as we'll see, it's very difficult to do so because

425
00:34:54.360 --> 00:34:59.239
he can't defend his own position.
And I just want to point out that

426
00:34:59.400 --> 00:35:05.039
Jay made make so many mistakes about
what he thinks Ivantamia's position is, what

427
00:35:05.119 --> 00:35:08.920
he thinks Ethity or Celefie Alqueda or
Creed is, And I'm going to try

428
00:35:08.920 --> 00:35:13.039
to point that at out as we
go along and when we get to cross

429
00:35:13.079 --> 00:35:16.280
examination section one by one, and
I just want to explain this to the

430
00:35:16.360 --> 00:35:22.800
audience. It should really be of
no surprise because Jay himself and people were

431
00:35:22.800 --> 00:35:27.320
wondering why did he delay this debate? Well, he delayed the debate because

432
00:35:27.320 --> 00:35:30.760
he told me that he was incapable
of having the debate unless he was able

433
00:35:30.800 --> 00:35:36.360
to read one text that was an
unreleased text in English. Okay, So

434
00:35:36.440 --> 00:35:39.840
this is a guy who just started
reading about Infantamia and Ethity Creed two weeks

435
00:35:39.880 --> 00:35:44.119
ago, and he thinks he's now
an expert. Isn't going to tell the

436
00:35:44.199 --> 00:35:47.599
audience all about it. It's honestly
a complete joke. Okay. So now

437
00:35:47.639 --> 00:35:52.119
let's get to some of what Jay
actually had to say here. He says

438
00:35:52.360 --> 00:35:58.440
that Ivantamia doesn't understand Orthodox trinitarianism.
Well, nobody would at this point because

439
00:35:58.440 --> 00:36:04.280
you didn't really explain it. But
nevertheless, what Mea says about Orthodox trinitarianism

440
00:36:04.599 --> 00:36:08.760
is irrelevant to this debate. I
didn't cite Itbenttainedia as an argument against Orthodox

441
00:36:08.800 --> 00:36:14.119
trinitarianism. I gave arguments in which
I've made numerous times, and you haven't

442
00:36:14.199 --> 00:36:16.840
responded to any of them, in
which you should have been able to preempt

443
00:36:16.840 --> 00:36:21.320
in your opening statement, because I've
been repeating them for five plus years.

444
00:36:21.639 --> 00:36:24.480
So that's the first thing. The
second thing is Jay makes a big to

445
00:36:24.519 --> 00:36:29.440
do about nominalism. Now I actually
appreciate that, Jay, and that's why

446
00:36:29.480 --> 00:36:35.159
I spent a significant portion of my
time speaking about our position of nominalism,

447
00:36:35.320 --> 00:36:39.960
because I think it's a clear difference
between the two views. If nominalism is

448
00:36:40.000 --> 00:36:45.920
true, then orthodox trinitarianism is necessarily
false. And I think even Jay Dyer

449
00:36:46.119 --> 00:36:52.280
would have to agree with this.
Why because they conceive of the universal that

450
00:36:52.400 --> 00:36:55.960
the three persons share, or the
essence as a universal that the three persons

451
00:36:55.960 --> 00:37:00.239
share. Well, if there are
no such things as emine universals, then

452
00:37:00.320 --> 00:37:06.360
quite literally, the trinity cannot exist. Now, Jay makes it seem so

453
00:37:06.599 --> 00:37:13.159
obvious as if these things such as
universals, these entities, and so if

454
00:37:13.199 --> 00:37:15.440
people don't know what they are,
right, you know, you can see

455
00:37:15.440 --> 00:37:20.199
this piece of paper here, this
white piece of paper. The idea that

456
00:37:20.320 --> 00:37:22.800
Jay Dyer wants us to believe,
that he thinks is so obvious, is

457
00:37:22.840 --> 00:37:27.920
that there is something can you picture, people, there's something in this piece

458
00:37:27.920 --> 00:37:34.280
of paper that is actually identical to
the white stripes and the whiteness in my

459
00:37:34.599 --> 00:37:38.199
color and my skin complexion. That's
what Jay Dyer wants us to believe is

460
00:37:38.239 --> 00:37:44.840
that there's this thing, there's this
thing that's universal whiteness which exists that is

461
00:37:44.920 --> 00:37:49.760
partially at least identical in the paper
and also in Jay's forehead. Well,

462
00:37:49.920 --> 00:37:52.639
if he thinks that that's so obvious, I'd like him to give an argument

463
00:37:52.719 --> 00:37:57.920
for that, because, based upon
Accham's razor, we should not be postulating

464
00:37:58.119 --> 00:38:02.480
entities beyond necessity. Jay Dyer has
given no argument for the existence of these

465
00:38:02.519 --> 00:38:07.840
so called Aristotelian imminent universals, and
this is going to be a big difference

466
00:38:07.880 --> 00:38:13.199
between us going up. So I
at least appreciate Jay having enough sense to

467
00:38:13.559 --> 00:38:17.679
know and understand that. Now he
makes a big to do about nominalist predication.

468
00:38:19.639 --> 00:38:22.280
I don't know if Jay has done
any reading on nominalism. I assume

469
00:38:22.360 --> 00:38:25.360
that he has, with all those
books behind him, But I'd like him

470
00:38:25.400 --> 00:38:31.559
to show me an argument from an
actually scholarly source that says that nominalist predication

471
00:38:31.800 --> 00:38:37.760
is meaningless, that unless there is
this weird thing, which is a universal

472
00:38:37.960 --> 00:38:43.840
that is partially identical in this white
piece of paper and in Jay's beautiful forehead

473
00:38:43.840 --> 00:38:46.920
over there, at least there is
something partially identical in them. It makes

474
00:38:47.039 --> 00:38:52.760
no sense to say that Jay's forehead
is white and this paper is white.

475
00:38:52.440 --> 00:38:57.679
Now does the public and the people
watching think that that's a convincing argument.

476
00:38:58.119 --> 00:39:00.880
No, Jay needs to give an
argus for his position. He has not

477
00:39:01.039 --> 00:39:05.840
given any argument for his position.
So until he can give an argument for

478
00:39:05.880 --> 00:39:10.280
the necessity of these types of universals, we can simply dismiss it. Now

479
00:39:10.920 --> 00:39:15.079
that ties into everything that he was
saying about a luss of Panothala, and

480
00:39:15.119 --> 00:39:21.760
he's mocking about God having so called
body parts pule if he's actually read the

481
00:39:21.800 --> 00:39:28.119
Fared Suliman source that he desperately needed
to delay the debate in order to read

482
00:39:28.239 --> 00:39:32.800
that, he would actually see that. Fared Suleiman explicitly says, as I

483
00:39:32.880 --> 00:39:37.920
quoted in my opening statement, that
the idea that Ivantamia's conception of God is

484
00:39:38.079 --> 00:39:45.119
overtly anthropomorphic is completely untenable, and
he cites numerous sources and gives arguments for

485
00:39:45.199 --> 00:39:49.000
that throughout the book. So Jake
can say he disagrees with that, and

486
00:39:49.039 --> 00:39:52.559
it's fine. But on the one
hand, you can't claim that Jake and

487
00:39:52.639 --> 00:39:57.679
the ethity saying that a loss of
Panotala has a hand is completely meaningless and

488
00:39:57.719 --> 00:40:01.119
on the other hand, say that
it's tesh or it's likening God to creation

489
00:40:01.360 --> 00:40:05.960
and having body parts. So you
cannot have it both ways. Jay,

490
00:40:06.320 --> 00:40:10.440
is the nominalist predication completely meaningless and
devoid of any content, or is it

491
00:40:10.519 --> 00:40:15.000
meaningful? And therefore we're likening God
to creation? And if you do think

492
00:40:15.039 --> 00:40:20.920
we're likening God to creation, then
what is your problem with that? Because

493
00:40:21.000 --> 00:40:25.840
you believe in the necessity of likening
God to creation in your concept of theosis,

494
00:40:25.840 --> 00:40:30.960
which I quoted from Saint Maximus to
Confessor in my opening statement. So

495
00:40:30.079 --> 00:40:32.320
even if let's say, for the
sake of argument, oh my god,

496
00:40:32.360 --> 00:40:37.599
this is terrible anthropomorphic, Jake is
likening God to creation. Okay, what

497
00:40:37.760 --> 00:40:39.880
is your problem with that? You
can't. You don't have an argument about

498
00:40:39.920 --> 00:40:45.280
that. You have no argument about
that whatsoever. So Jay needs to deal

499
00:40:45.320 --> 00:40:51.880
with those points. He mentions about
indexicals and God's knowledge. Well, actually,

500
00:40:51.920 --> 00:40:55.400
before I get to this, since
there's another important point here, let

501
00:40:55.480 --> 00:41:00.480
me see, there's so much nonsense
he mentioned, he said, Oh,

502
00:41:00.519 --> 00:41:06.280
he said, even Jake believes in
two ways of counting. He believes in

503
00:41:06.639 --> 00:41:10.280
accounting by identity, and then he
also believes in counting by division. When

504
00:41:10.320 --> 00:41:14.119
it comes to a law, and
he said, you see, he mentioned

505
00:41:14.119 --> 00:41:17.079
that a law's attributes are inseparable from
each other. I mean, honestly,

506
00:41:17.199 --> 00:41:22.159
Jay, where did you get this
from. This is the most ridiculous thing

507
00:41:22.199 --> 00:41:24.960
I've ever heard. That we're counting
by division. No, in fact,

508
00:41:25.239 --> 00:41:30.039
by the fact that they're inseparable from
one another and inseparable from the essence,

509
00:41:30.559 --> 00:41:36.199
means that we are counting them by
identity. Because if we were counting them

510
00:41:36.239 --> 00:41:39.199
by division, then we would say
that a loss of panal data only has

511
00:41:39.320 --> 00:41:44.400
one attribute. But we say that
he has many attributes, and yet they

512
00:41:44.440 --> 00:41:47.440
are not divided by time and space. So how do we say that there

513
00:41:47.480 --> 00:41:53.360
are many attributes and yet they're not
divided by time and space are separable because

514
00:41:53.400 --> 00:41:59.280
we're counting them by identity. Wow, I don't know how you made such

515
00:41:59.320 --> 00:42:02.760
a big blunt there. So you
need to show how I'm counting by a

516
00:42:02.920 --> 00:42:07.960
division or separability when it comes to
attributes or the essence. That was a

517
00:42:07.519 --> 00:42:14.199
big blunder. Okay, So here
we go the next part. Here where

518
00:42:14.599 --> 00:42:19.960
Jay mentioned about the indexicles, I
want to read a quote from one of

519
00:42:20.000 --> 00:42:24.000
his authors that he appeals to.
Let me just bring it up here.

520
00:42:25.480 --> 00:42:30.760
Okay, So on indexicals, he
says, well, Jake has a strange

521
00:42:30.840 --> 00:42:36.559
understanding of God's knowledge. Well,
that's let's see if that's the case when

522
00:42:36.599 --> 00:42:39.320
it comes to these indexicles or the
eye. Well, I'm going to show

523
00:42:39.360 --> 00:42:45.159
you in a source here from Jay's
own people, that that is exactly the

524
00:42:45.199 --> 00:42:49.039
case. If I can ever find
a damn quote, let me see here.

525
00:42:49.880 --> 00:42:55.719
Okay, fifteen seconds. Okay,
I'll get to that quote in my

526
00:42:57.519 --> 00:43:01.760
next rebuttal, but I'll show you
that Jay his own church writers explicitly use

527
00:43:01.880 --> 00:43:07.800
the indexical eye and appealing to God's
knowledge. With that, we'll kick it

528
00:43:07.840 --> 00:43:10.119
over to Jay for his ten minute
rebuttal as well. If you haven't yet,

529
00:43:10.119 --> 00:43:14.440
folks, hit that like button,
not for me, but for you

530
00:43:14.639 --> 00:43:17.639
so that YouTube knows what to serve
you more of where that things? Very

531
00:43:17.719 --> 00:43:22.239
much, Jay, The floor is
all yours. Yeah again. I think

532
00:43:22.320 --> 00:43:29.280
Jake missed a lot of the classes
that dealt with basics of epistemology and metaphysics

533
00:43:29.320 --> 00:43:32.360
because Jake misunderstood a lot of points
that I made made some pretty rooky mistakes.

534
00:43:32.679 --> 00:43:39.800
For example, he appealed to my
argumentation about realist notions of universals on

535
00:43:39.840 --> 00:43:43.679
the basis of saying that, well, because we know this because of Okham's

536
00:43:43.760 --> 00:43:45.880
razor, Well, how do we
know Aukham's razor is true in all cases

537
00:43:45.880 --> 00:43:50.199
are true? In this case,
that's just an arbitrary appeal. It's just

538
00:43:50.199 --> 00:43:53.840
an appeal to some other thing that
we don't actually know really grounds and disproves

539
00:43:53.880 --> 00:43:58.440
the reality of universals. He says, I didn't give arguments about universals.

540
00:43:58.679 --> 00:44:06.280
I gave multiple arguments about how there's
no empirical verification or observation of metaphysical objects

541
00:44:06.320 --> 00:44:10.360
that Jake believes in. That is
itself the undercutting and the disproof of his

542
00:44:10.480 --> 00:44:17.239
nominalism. Jake doesn't appear to be
aware of classic critiques and reputations and questions

543
00:44:17.239 --> 00:44:23.000
for the nominalist empiricist tradition which he's
aligned himself with. Further, I would

544
00:44:23.039 --> 00:44:27.840
add to I didn't delay the debate
just because I needed to read one book.

545
00:44:28.079 --> 00:44:30.559
I asked him if he was willing
to delay debate because it's relevant for

546
00:44:30.800 --> 00:44:36.719
the debate that we're having, and
it's a newly published book about the school

547
00:44:36.760 --> 00:44:38.679
of theology that he believes in,
So that was the real reason for that.

548
00:44:38.760 --> 00:44:42.320
He knows that, but he just
is looking for anything to grasp that

549
00:44:42.440 --> 00:44:45.599
at this point. So again,
let's get back to this point about what

550
00:44:46.719 --> 00:44:52.960
empiricism anomalism says. Empiricism says that
we begin our theology from sense data.

551
00:44:52.039 --> 00:44:58.639
I made the argument that we can't
even know that the peripatetic axiom is true

552
00:44:59.079 --> 00:45:02.199
on the basis of s there's nothing
in sense data that tells you that knowledge

553
00:45:02.199 --> 00:45:06.320
comes from sense data. And if
that's the case, then all of the

554
00:45:06.440 --> 00:45:09.639
arguments that David Hume makes about identity
over time meaning over time, those are

555
00:45:09.679 --> 00:45:14.880
all arguments. And you notice that
if you paid attention to my slides and

556
00:45:14.920 --> 00:45:17.960
my talk, I did give arguments. I listed many many arguments, And

557
00:45:17.960 --> 00:45:21.599
it's true I did focus on Jake's
position because I knew we would get to

558
00:45:21.639 --> 00:45:24.480
the trinity in later discussions in the
debate. I'm happy to defend any of

559
00:45:24.480 --> 00:45:28.800
the arguments that Jake has against the
trinity, but I want to know that

560
00:45:29.440 --> 00:45:32.920
how he'd actually makes sense. And
you know, Jake said that he made

561
00:45:32.920 --> 00:45:37.199
all of these arguments that I didn't
address. I didn't actually hear an argument.

562
00:45:37.239 --> 00:45:40.440
I heard a bunch of assertions as
to what his position is about the

563
00:45:40.519 --> 00:45:45.800
creed, what his position is about
unity. I didn't actually hear an argument,

564
00:45:45.880 --> 00:45:50.440
so I don't think Jake understands the
difference between asserting something and actually claiming

565
00:45:50.480 --> 00:45:53.800
something. I actually went into multiple
texts, multiple scholars. I didn't just

566
00:45:53.840 --> 00:45:55.760
rely on one. And by the
way, I want to address that he's

567
00:45:55.760 --> 00:46:00.079
wrong about what he says about First
of all, Boyarin, I didn't claim

568
00:46:00.159 --> 00:46:07.639
that those Jewish theologians taught the Trinity. That's false, so Jake's incorrect.

569
00:46:07.639 --> 00:46:09.480
I didn't say that they taught the
Trinity. I said that they talked about

570
00:46:09.519 --> 00:46:15.079
the reality of multiple hypostases. That
could be Minitarianism, that could be a

571
00:46:15.079 --> 00:46:19.599
form of Trinitarianism, and certain cabalists, it could be the other schools that

572
00:46:19.639 --> 00:46:24.159
were strictly unitarian. I just simply
pointed out that early Judaism was not monolithic,

573
00:46:24.400 --> 00:46:29.239
and that was enough to demonstrate that
you couldn't use the argument that Daniel

574
00:46:29.280 --> 00:46:34.639
Hikikichu used that the Old Testament was
quote unitarian, or that the prophets taught

575
00:46:34.719 --> 00:46:37.840
Unitarianism and that this is a corruption. It was just simply demonstrating that there

576
00:46:37.840 --> 00:46:45.039
were Jews in the first first two
centuries that were not believers in strict Unitarianism,

577
00:46:45.159 --> 00:46:50.079
and beyond that, there were actually
Jews who were Trinitarians, and they

578
00:46:50.119 --> 00:46:58.320
were called Christians. And that's why
Barren says that Christianity is a conservative form

579
00:46:58.360 --> 00:47:02.119
of Judaism. So all all I
was doing was demonstrating that Daniel's arguments that

580
00:47:02.280 --> 00:47:07.960
Judaism is somehow inherently unitarian are not
true. That's all I needed to demonstrate.

581
00:47:07.280 --> 00:47:12.039
So he's setting up a strong man
about something I didn't argue. Next,

582
00:47:12.079 --> 00:47:16.920
I'll address the fact that the logos
theology that he talked about, there's

583
00:47:16.920 --> 00:47:22.000
not one logos theology that one guy
had, and everybody got this from Filo

584
00:47:22.159 --> 00:47:28.039
or someone else and then it got
rejected. Jake is completely ignorant of Athanasius,

585
00:47:28.280 --> 00:47:32.079
who engages in consistent logos theology argumentation, is the foremost theologian at the

586
00:47:32.079 --> 00:47:36.960
Council of Nicea. So this idea
that logos theology is not used post nice

587
00:47:37.159 --> 00:47:40.519
or whatever dumb argument he made,
is totally not true. Clement of Alexandria,

588
00:47:40.599 --> 00:47:45.880
all the Alexandrian fathers in tradition often
used this logos argumentation. Some of

589
00:47:45.920 --> 00:47:52.199
the logos apologists of the first and
second century eventually did go into weird deviations.

590
00:47:52.480 --> 00:47:55.480
But that doesn't mean that all logos
theology is false. Logos theology is

591
00:47:55.519 --> 00:47:59.719
in John one, and it's in
the Wisdom text of the Old Testament.

592
00:48:00.199 --> 00:48:04.280
It didn't come out of Plato.
There's a plenty of scholarship that will note,

593
00:48:04.800 --> 00:48:06.960
as even some of these Jewish scholars
do, that it goes back to

594
00:48:07.400 --> 00:48:10.920
the Wisdom, dex Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, and so forth. How that's cashed

595
00:48:10.960 --> 00:48:15.719
out by different theologians is a different
question. So Jake doesn't understand what logos

596
00:48:15.719 --> 00:48:20.920
theology is, and he doesn't understand
uh, the first three centuries of Christianity.

597
00:48:22.239 --> 00:48:27.679
I would add as well that Jake
doesn't understand what an internal critique is.

598
00:48:28.960 --> 00:48:31.559
He thinks that when I make an
internal critique that I have to then

599
00:48:31.719 --> 00:48:36.239
agree with the thing that I'm critiquing. So if I say that his position

600
00:48:36.880 --> 00:48:39.920
is anthropomorphic, I shouldn't have a
problem with it because I'm a well I

601
00:48:40.000 --> 00:48:46.320
believe in But dude, I'm not
saying that I'm I'm critiquing your position.

602
00:48:46.639 --> 00:48:52.480
So Jake doesn't literally doesn't grasp what
an internal critique is. That's also why

603
00:48:52.480 --> 00:48:54.679
he doesn't understand what tag is.
Jake, as we said, is a

604
00:48:54.760 --> 00:48:59.960
foundationalist. He's a very one dimensional, one layer thinker, so he doesn't

605
00:49:00.159 --> 00:49:05.400
understand meta level questions, even though
ironically he's called the Muslim meta position.

606
00:49:05.760 --> 00:49:08.159
So he ought to be at least
aware of what metallogical issues are. That's

607
00:49:08.199 --> 00:49:13.960
what the transcendental argument is. You
ought to be aware of metaphysical issues.

608
00:49:14.119 --> 00:49:16.360
I don't think he actually is.
I think he copies and paste out of

609
00:49:16.440 --> 00:49:20.920
various scholars that fit his need.
For example, he uses us when he's

610
00:49:21.000 --> 00:49:24.639
arguing with Anthony Rodgers, he uses
you know, analytical you know, William

611
00:49:24.679 --> 00:49:29.719
Lane Craig. So he's just picking
and choosing when it fits the case.

612
00:49:29.760 --> 00:49:32.079
And he also seems to sort of
move his positions in the midst of various

613
00:49:32.079 --> 00:49:37.039
debates. He has a history of
that, so I'm interested to see where

614
00:49:37.079 --> 00:49:38.800
he's going to go. When we
ask him about the attributes, whether they

615
00:49:38.920 --> 00:49:44.800
possess a saiety considered in themselves or
not, he said that inseparability is not

616
00:49:44.880 --> 00:49:49.360
counting by division, is counting by
identity, and then he proceeded to say

617
00:49:49.360 --> 00:49:53.480
that because we identify Allah's essence as
one, he totally missed the point that

618
00:49:53.519 --> 00:49:57.800
I said. I said that he
does both that was the argument I made.

619
00:49:57.800 --> 00:50:01.159
I didn't say that he only counts
by division by using the word inseparability.

620
00:50:01.519 --> 00:50:05.760
But he doesn't even seem to realize
that. In the ancient medieval world,

621
00:50:06.159 --> 00:50:09.800
whether it's al Gazali, whether it's
aristotl in category six, whether it's

622
00:50:09.840 --> 00:50:14.519
the Cappadocians, whether it's Maximus,
whether it's the Nice in Creed, the

623
00:50:14.599 --> 00:50:20.559
ancient world consistently and commonly thought about
counting by division. We use this argument

624
00:50:20.599 --> 00:50:22.880
all the time, especially when we
refer to Maximus in the Ambiguous. I

625
00:50:22.880 --> 00:50:28.639
think it's question one where Maximus talks
about unity being a single monad, and

626
00:50:28.679 --> 00:50:32.039
then division being the separability that gives
us two, and then another form of

627
00:50:32.039 --> 00:50:36.159
separability which gives us the triad or
gives us three. I'm not talking about

628
00:50:36.159 --> 00:50:37.800
the trinity. I'm just talking about
counting. That's how they thought, That's

629
00:50:37.800 --> 00:50:43.000
how they counted, right in moderation
and belief. This is how al Ghazali

630
00:50:43.119 --> 00:50:45.159
counts, for example. So it
was common in the ancient world. Jake

631
00:50:45.199 --> 00:50:47.920
doesn't even know this. He thinks
that it's something that was made up,

632
00:50:49.239 --> 00:50:52.480
and then he thinks that everybody just
quote counts by identity. He says in

633
00:50:52.519 --> 00:50:55.800
one of his debates. This is
just how he count today, like we

634
00:50:55.920 --> 00:51:00.599
count today like this, Hakoma,
Oh, don't even count like that,

635
00:51:00.800 --> 00:51:06.079
not even aware that this is how
people counted in his own Islamic schools.

636
00:51:06.119 --> 00:51:08.480
Maybe not his school per se,
because this wasn't an issue of debate.

637
00:51:08.800 --> 00:51:13.239
But al Gazali counts this way.
I can show you in moderation and believe

638
00:51:13.239 --> 00:51:16.119
where he counts this way. For
example, it's the tenth proposition. Here

639
00:51:16.199 --> 00:51:20.239
we go, Oh, he ain't
gotten no Islamic books, he ain't gonna

640
00:51:20.239 --> 00:51:22.039
no reading. Oh really, how
about this right here where Algazoli in the

641
00:51:22.039 --> 00:51:28.280
tenth proposition is counting by the de
jen So Jake doesn't know what he's talking

642
00:51:28.320 --> 00:51:30.800
about. When we came to the
body parts, however, I didn't say

643
00:51:30.960 --> 00:51:37.719
that even to me, what gave
no catafatic meaning? I said he contradicted.

644
00:51:38.559 --> 00:51:42.119
So Jake said, well, there's
a place in the Soul Mom book

645
00:51:42.119 --> 00:51:45.440
where he says that that it's perfectly
fine to speak this way. I didn't

646
00:51:45.440 --> 00:51:50.960
say that. I never claimed that. I claimed that he contradicts by saying

647
00:51:51.000 --> 00:51:53.760
two different things. So again Jake
didn't even understand the argument, or it

648
00:51:53.800 --> 00:51:57.639
went over his head, or he
just didn't want to address it. And

649
00:51:57.760 --> 00:52:04.480
Jake, again has a notorious history
of in debates not addressing any actual arguments.

650
00:52:04.559 --> 00:52:07.760
He blows past them, and he
literally thinks that asserting something is an

651
00:52:07.840 --> 00:52:12.480
argument, And you can see that
when he came to the treatment of tag.

652
00:52:13.400 --> 00:52:17.199
Tag is a metal level argument about
arguing in logic itself, and Jake

653
00:52:17.239 --> 00:52:21.840
says, well, what's the argument
of the logic for that? Yeah,

654
00:52:21.880 --> 00:52:25.880
exactly, it's a preconceptual, preconditioned
type of argument. Now, Jake is

655
00:52:25.880 --> 00:52:30.440
in the tradition of the empiricists,
so I would think he would be pretty

656
00:52:30.440 --> 00:52:35.880
familiar with the ideas of analytic and
synthetic truths and law priori truths how much

657
00:52:36.400 --> 00:52:39.039
one minute left one minute, But
he doesn't seem to be aware of those

658
00:52:39.039 --> 00:52:44.599
things at all, because his treatment
of empiricism is naive empiricism. And again,

659
00:52:44.639 --> 00:52:47.760
when we get into cross examination,
we're gonna see that does he believe

660
00:52:47.760 --> 00:52:52.639
in self evident truths like his masters
and his teachers do? And he says

661
00:52:52.639 --> 00:52:58.199
that even to me, a book's
not even relevant for this for this debate.

662
00:52:58.679 --> 00:53:01.960
Yeah, you said it is,
because you said that he's your palamos,

663
00:53:02.039 --> 00:53:05.880
So why would he not be relevant, relevant for the debate when he's

664
00:53:06.280 --> 00:53:08.679
for us, he's a Palomas,
is a pillar of Orthodoxy. You know

665
00:53:08.760 --> 00:53:14.079
that I have the DM where you
told me that he represents the Palamas for

666
00:53:14.159 --> 00:53:17.360
your tradition. So is so the
pillar of your tradition isn't relevant for this

667
00:53:17.400 --> 00:53:21.880
debate? No, you just don't
want to go to that because you know

668
00:53:21.960 --> 00:53:24.000
I did read it, and you
want to stick to some other things,

669
00:53:24.000 --> 00:53:28.960
some other text when you know good
and well that he's perfectly a representative of

670
00:53:28.960 --> 00:53:35.280
your tradition, if he's the palaboss
of your tradition. Time this one I

671
00:53:35.519 --> 00:53:37.719
just realized. So on, So
thank you very much, gentlemen, for

672
00:53:37.760 --> 00:53:42.679
those rebuttals. Jake, I am
sorry. I accidentally are you. When

673
00:53:42.719 --> 00:53:46.320
you guys ask for the one minute
warnings, I screwed up mentally and when

674
00:53:46.320 --> 00:53:50.280
I was supposed to give you your
one minute warning, I accidentally gave it

675
00:53:50.280 --> 00:53:53.840
to you, where basically I accidentally
gave you one less minute. So what

676
00:53:53.840 --> 00:53:57.880
I'm going to do is for these
next rebuttals, which are supposed to be

677
00:53:57.920 --> 00:54:00.119
five and five minutes, I'm going
to tack on that minute back on to

678
00:54:00.199 --> 00:54:02.119
yours, Jake, just to keep
it fair. I'm sorry about that,

679
00:54:02.199 --> 00:54:07.159
my mistake, and so we'll have
these second rebuttals. Uh, just to

680
00:54:07.199 --> 00:54:12.079
understand what you're saying. So I
only spoke, I spoke for nine minutes

681
00:54:12.119 --> 00:54:15.079
instead of ten, so I'll be
getting six minutes instead of five this time.

682
00:54:15.159 --> 00:54:17.440
Is that it exactly basically moving the
because there was my mistake. I

683
00:54:17.519 --> 00:54:22.320
cut you off a minute early.
So taking that to keep it equal,

684
00:54:22.480 --> 00:54:24.480
so you have equal time in the
debate, I'm gonna take that missed minute.

685
00:54:24.599 --> 00:54:27.559
I'll let you. I'll let you, I'll let you slide. But

686
00:54:27.639 --> 00:54:30.639
it's gonna come out of your pay. But that's fine, you got it.

687
00:54:30.840 --> 00:54:31.960
I'll still give you six if you
want it. You don't have to.

688
00:54:31.960 --> 00:54:34.760
If you want to use five,
that's fine. But with that,

689
00:54:35.199 --> 00:54:37.599
thank you very much, gentlemen.
The floor is all yours. Jake.

690
00:54:37.119 --> 00:54:39.960
I've got it set for six minutes. I'll give you the warning at one

691
00:54:40.039 --> 00:54:45.199
minute until that's done. Okay,
here we go six minutes. So Jay,

692
00:54:46.119 --> 00:54:52.159
you know, it's so funny to
me that you say that I didn't

693
00:54:52.639 --> 00:54:55.920
that I'm just making assertions the whole
time. Jake is only making assertions.

694
00:54:55.920 --> 00:55:00.639
He didn't hear any arguments. Well, I'll just repeat my argument because Jay,

695
00:55:00.760 --> 00:55:04.159
maybe he honestly didn't hear them.
I have no idea, because you

696
00:55:04.239 --> 00:55:08.360
didn't respond to a single argument that
I gave. I actually engaged with your

697
00:55:08.599 --> 00:55:13.679
fifteen minutes of nonsense. To the
best of my ability. You didn't engage

698
00:55:13.679 --> 00:55:16.639
with a single one of my arguments. You didn't respond to my arguments asserting

699
00:55:16.679 --> 00:55:22.239
that you guys are polytheists based on
the LPT. You didn't respond to my

700
00:55:22.400 --> 00:55:28.000
argument about them not having the same
power or knowledge other than assuming that I

701
00:55:28.039 --> 00:55:34.119
said that these must be energies.
No, my entire critique is that the

702
00:55:34.280 --> 00:55:39.599
Orthodox say that they're not energies.
They make an exception between the begetting and

703
00:55:39.639 --> 00:55:45.440
the spir rating and God's knowledge and
these other things when they're not shared.

704
00:55:45.840 --> 00:55:51.719
And that's the whole problem with your
universalist perspective, is that you don't have

705
00:55:51.800 --> 00:55:57.519
the necessary and sufficient conditions for what
an essence is. You make exceptions,

706
00:55:57.559 --> 00:56:02.960
And maybe you're not familiar with the
classical critique of the Aristotelian position regarding universals,

707
00:56:02.960 --> 00:56:07.360
which you basically hold to. That
we can come up with all sorts

708
00:56:07.360 --> 00:56:10.599
of exception cases that you don't have
answers to, And that's the point.

709
00:56:10.760 --> 00:56:15.079
You make an exception. You say, oh, they still have the same

710
00:56:15.159 --> 00:56:19.119
power, even though the Father alone
has the power to beget the son in

711
00:56:19.159 --> 00:56:22.960
a holy spirit. And by the
way, the Catholics actually disagree on this

712
00:56:22.119 --> 00:56:29.239
point, and they make that very
same argument that the Orthodox are guilty of,

713
00:56:29.280 --> 00:56:32.559
saying that the Father alone has the
power to cause another divine person and

714
00:56:32.639 --> 00:56:37.280
because of that, they don't have
equal power. So don't act like I

715
00:56:37.440 --> 00:56:42.199
just pulled this argument out of my
backside. I didn't. Let's go further

716
00:56:42.280 --> 00:56:45.400
here again, he keeps saying,
I'm just making assertions. No, I've

717
00:56:45.440 --> 00:56:49.840
made arguments. I gave my argument
on the LPT, whether you think it's

718
00:56:49.920 --> 00:56:52.039
ridiculous or not. I made the
argument that they can't be the same God

719
00:56:52.079 --> 00:56:55.199
because they don't have the same power
and knowledge. Now let's get to this

720
00:56:55.280 --> 00:57:01.360
point that you made about knowledge.
Okay. I have the quote here ready,

721
00:57:01.679 --> 00:57:07.000
all right, which is from Dimitri
stan Eloy, and he says in

722
00:57:07.199 --> 00:57:12.159
the Experience of God Value one,
page one fifty two, I'd love to

723
00:57:12.199 --> 00:57:14.719
see what you think of this,
Jay. He says that, I quote,

724
00:57:15.039 --> 00:57:19.760
the life of the eternal subjectivity must
be a fullness, which in all

725
00:57:19.800 --> 00:57:23.199
respects is not a transitory one.
It must consist in a love for another

726
00:57:23.280 --> 00:57:29.320
subjectivity, and in the perfect union
between itself and that subjectivity, which has

727
00:57:29.320 --> 00:57:34.159
the same fullness, so as to
be simultaneously unfailing life. The life of

728
00:57:34.199 --> 00:57:40.360
the eternal subjectivity is an infinite reference
to its subjectivity, contemplated within another eye,

729
00:57:40.840 --> 00:57:45.159
within another quote unquote I, so
as to be true love, eternal

730
00:57:45.280 --> 00:57:51.719
unfailing love. It is reference to
another I, who is himself also the

731
00:57:51.719 --> 00:57:57.679
bearer of his own infinite subjectivity,
and responds within that same eternal, unfailing

732
00:57:57.719 --> 00:58:01.440
love, a divine I love with
an eternal, inexhaustible love, a thing

733
00:58:01.519 --> 00:58:07.440
proper to the divine or with its
fullness which is like that of another eye.

734
00:58:07.719 --> 00:58:12.800
And this occurs in reciprocity. This
is divine life, this divine love.

735
00:58:13.239 --> 00:58:15.880
Sorry, this is divine life,
and it exists together with immutable fullness.

736
00:58:15.960 --> 00:58:20.440
It is the same infinite existence of
love, the love of an infinite

737
00:58:20.440 --> 00:58:24.480
person directed towards another person worthy of
infinite love, and vice versa, but

738
00:58:24.559 --> 00:58:31.360
within the inferiority interiority of the same
subjectivity. In other circumstances, eternally would

739
00:58:31.400 --> 00:58:37.360
either be an unbearable boredom if it
were the prerogative of a single consciousness.

740
00:58:37.599 --> 00:58:44.880
Thereby he's saying there are three consciousnesses
within the trinity or three minds. Well,

741
00:58:44.920 --> 00:58:47.840
if three consciousness or three minds in
the Trinity isn't polytheism, then I

742
00:58:47.840 --> 00:58:52.159
don't know what the hell is?
What is the standard? And he's saying

743
00:58:52.239 --> 00:58:57.800
that that is the contemplation of another
consciousness or else an absurdity. If it

744
00:58:57.840 --> 00:59:00.920
were prerogative of a substance of law
that was aimless. He's basically saying,

745
00:59:01.039 --> 00:59:06.039
oh, my god, God would
be bored if he didn't have another God

746
00:59:06.079 --> 00:59:08.320
to sit there and talk to.
Okay, So don't make it seem like,

747
00:59:08.400 --> 00:59:13.000
oh, Jake has no idea.
The Orthodox don't have this concept of

748
00:59:13.079 --> 00:59:16.199
knowledge. Well, what is he
talking about here? In the subjectivity of

749
00:59:16.239 --> 00:59:22.280
the different divine persons, they have
a self referential eye which accounts for the

750
00:59:22.400 --> 00:59:27.440
mutual love. Otherwise they would all
be bored. And he says that if

751
00:59:27.480 --> 00:59:31.480
it were the prerogative of a single
consciousness, meaning there are three consciousnesses in

752
00:59:31.519 --> 00:59:36.000
the trinity, Jay, So how
do you defend that three consciousnesses in the

753
00:59:36.039 --> 00:59:40.719
trinity is not polytheism? One minute
left? Now back to the whole issue

754
00:59:40.840 --> 00:59:46.239
of epistemology. Jay thinks that I
don't understand. I do understand the criticisms,

755
00:59:46.559 --> 00:59:51.320
and I knew that he was going
to bring this critique because he doesn't

756
00:59:51.320 --> 00:59:55.199
want to talk about Trinity versus Taalheed. He wants to talk about epistemology because

757
00:59:55.239 --> 00:59:59.880
he knows that he can't respond to
my actual arguments. So he's spending the

758
01:00:00.000 --> 01:00:05.239
the entire time trying to criticize my
position without a defense of his own position

759
01:00:05.320 --> 01:00:08.320
in response to my arguments, And
he wants to make the debate about epistemology.

760
01:00:08.519 --> 01:00:10.960
But I knew he was gonna do
that. That's why I included that

761
01:00:12.000 --> 01:00:15.639
in my opening statement. But I'd
be happy to have an entirely separate debate

762
01:00:15.800 --> 01:00:20.920
about epistemology. But Jay wants to
make it only about that in this debate

763
01:00:21.079 --> 01:00:23.320
because you know he can't defend his
actual position. But I'd be happy to

764
01:00:23.320 --> 01:00:25.639
go through that. And if you
want to talk about self evident truth,

765
01:00:27.320 --> 01:00:30.840
I'd be happy to talk about that. But whatever your critiques are of them,

766
01:00:30.079 --> 01:00:35.880
as you've already admitted, you can't
give a justification to something that is

767
01:00:36.199 --> 01:00:39.000
metallogical, and therefore I can tell
you the same exact thing. And we're

768
01:00:39.119 --> 01:00:44.719
at an intellectual stalemate and times.
With that, we're gonna kick it over

769
01:00:44.800 --> 01:00:46.840
to Jay for his five minute REBUTTAL
want to let you know, folks,

770
01:00:46.920 --> 01:00:50.679
at the very end, they'll have
their closing statements, or I should say

771
01:00:50.719 --> 01:00:54.039
second to the end, which will
be flipped in other words, different from

772
01:00:54.119 --> 01:00:59.519
usual. It'll actually be instead of
Jake going first and then Jay, it'll

773
01:00:59.519 --> 01:01:04.880
be flipped where it'll instead we'll explain
when we get there with that. Hold

774
01:01:04.960 --> 01:01:07.639
on a second, I didn't understand
what you just said. I'll like,

775
01:01:08.000 --> 01:01:10.719
I'm putting the cart before the horse. I'll explain that once we get there.

776
01:01:10.960 --> 01:01:14.960
But you had mentioned it earlier in
our discussion on how you guys wanted

777
01:01:14.960 --> 01:01:17.199
it, so I'll bring it up
later though. But Jay, thank you

778
01:01:17.280 --> 01:01:23.639
very much. The floor it's all
yours. Yeah. So I just wanted

779
01:01:23.639 --> 01:01:28.840
to point out here that one of
the things that would definitely help Jake in

780
01:01:28.880 --> 01:01:32.440
the future if he wants to understand
the history of Christian metaphysics and the distinctions

781
01:01:32.480 --> 01:01:37.760
that he's not able to actually make, is this great book here, Christian

782
01:01:37.760 --> 01:01:42.840
Theology in the End of Ancient Metaphysics. And this is a new recent book

783
01:01:42.880 --> 01:01:46.159
in the scholarship. It's by Johann
zach Kuber, and it's really good for

784
01:01:46.239 --> 01:01:51.360
pointing out that we don't, for
example, think that the essence of God

785
01:01:51.519 --> 01:01:53.400
is a universal. This is a
fundamental mistake. I don't know where you

786
01:01:53.440 --> 01:01:59.119
got this. I think he misunderstood
the idea of the comparison between the capped

787
01:01:59.159 --> 01:02:02.599
Doocians, saying that the essence of
God is common and therefore it's like the

788
01:02:02.679 --> 01:02:07.199
relationship between a universal in a particular. But the essence of God itself is

789
01:02:07.239 --> 01:02:12.239
not actually a universal in the sense
of the way that we understand universal.

790
01:02:12.280 --> 01:02:15.440
Same Maximus, So the Confessor famously
that teaches, as does John Mascus,

791
01:02:15.480 --> 01:02:21.079
that universals are created. God is
not created, and so universals cannot be

792
01:02:21.159 --> 01:02:27.679
the essence of God. So Jake
misunderstood in an analogy comparing the universal relationship

793
01:02:27.719 --> 01:02:32.159
between creatures and the participation that they
have in the one in regard to the

794
01:02:32.159 --> 01:02:37.159
many versus the relationship of the one
and the many in God. It's just

795
01:02:37.199 --> 01:02:42.519
an analogy that cappedditions make, and
so Jake misunderstood. They're very fundamental misunderstanding.

796
01:02:42.880 --> 01:02:49.679
Jake equivocated on the term power.
So I'm gonna quit screensharing there So

797
01:02:49.760 --> 01:02:52.519
what I said was is that for
that arguments a whole, which is actually

798
01:02:52.559 --> 01:02:58.880
a Uno Meann argument, the notion
of begetting would have to be an energy.

799
01:02:58.920 --> 01:03:01.960
And this is the argument that you
know makes against Nissa against Eunomias,

800
01:03:02.719 --> 01:03:07.079
and the argument is that begetting is
not a power. So Jakeson's equivocating on

801
01:03:07.119 --> 01:03:13.119
the distinction between hypothetic properties and powers, and the fact that Roman Catholics claim

802
01:03:13.199 --> 01:03:15.239
this really has nothing to do with
our debate. Romancallics claim all kinds of

803
01:03:15.239 --> 01:03:19.119
things. Jake doesn't believe in Roman
Catholicism, so he wants to try to

804
01:03:19.199 --> 01:03:22.440
use an argument as if that would
have any weight in this debate. Really

805
01:03:22.480 --> 01:03:24.440
doesn't matter what Roman Catholics say,
he says, I didn't reply to the

806
01:03:24.559 --> 01:03:28.800
LPT. I did reply to the
LPT. I pointed out that his argument

807
01:03:28.920 --> 01:03:31.840
and his use of it relies on
counting in one way, counting by identity.

808
01:03:32.159 --> 01:03:37.159
I specifically addressed twice now that both
of us count by identity and both

809
01:03:37.199 --> 01:03:40.920
of us count by division. I
gave multiple people in the past who count

810
01:03:40.920 --> 01:03:45.199
this way. Jake ignored. All
that Jake acts like this is all made

811
01:03:45.320 --> 01:03:49.280
up. In recent livestreams of talks, He's actually acted like, why don't

812
01:03:49.320 --> 01:03:52.760
Joe count the way everybody does today, not even aware of the basic fact

813
01:03:52.800 --> 01:03:58.440
that ancient medieval world counted also this
way. I mentioned in my opening statement

814
01:03:58.519 --> 01:04:01.199
first order and second order in position, that certain things can be counted by

815
01:04:01.239 --> 01:04:05.079
identity and certain things can be counted
by division. Even back in the ancient

816
01:04:05.199 --> 01:04:10.079
medieval world. This became a medieval
distinction first order second order in position.

817
01:04:10.760 --> 01:04:16.840
If we want to go back to
my opening statement, I said that you

818
01:04:16.880 --> 01:04:24.559
could think of things like, let's
see where I put this. You could

819
01:04:24.800 --> 01:04:28.760
let me see. You could think
of things like first order in position would

820
01:04:28.800 --> 01:04:33.159
be things like mundane objects of cats, cows, dogs, so they would

821
01:04:33.159 --> 01:04:39.519
be concrete objects in the world.
And then you could think about abstract objects

822
01:04:39.920 --> 01:04:44.599
like sets or laws of logic.
Those would be counted by identity, because

823
01:04:44.599 --> 01:04:47.079
it doesn't really make sense to think
of, for example, one third of

824
01:04:47.119 --> 01:04:51.039
a law of logic or one third
of a set of things. Right,

825
01:04:51.039 --> 01:04:58.039
So abstract things in this case created
abstract things and would be counted by identity.

826
01:04:58.559 --> 01:05:01.679
But things that might be part of
or are divisible have to be counted

827
01:05:01.679 --> 01:05:05.519
by division. And this is actually
in even today's literature. So Jake's acting

828
01:05:05.639 --> 01:05:10.079
like, we don't count his way
today, Dog, we don't count his

829
01:05:10.159 --> 01:05:13.559
way today? Oh really? Well, I mean, I've got academic scholars

830
01:05:13.599 --> 01:05:18.239
here talking about the theory of mathematics
and countings, like like the David Leibsman

831
01:05:18.320 --> 01:05:23.519
paper where he goes into great detail
arguing that no, actually we do still

832
01:05:23.559 --> 01:05:26.880
count by division. You just have
to be more nuanced about it. I

833
01:05:26.960 --> 01:05:30.719
specifically argued again that Jake, in
his own accounting for the attributes in the

834
01:05:30.800 --> 01:05:35.119
Essence, also counts by identity and
by division. And he used the very

835
01:05:35.199 --> 01:05:39.840
terminology that relates to county by division, and he got upset by that.

836
01:05:39.920 --> 01:05:42.440
He got a little rattled, and
they had to say, that's not what

837
01:05:42.480 --> 01:05:45.760
it means. Bro, that's not
what it means. Dog. Now he

838
01:05:45.840 --> 01:05:51.599
mentioned the idea of unitarianism in modes. Jake doesn't understand the difference between in

839
01:05:51.599 --> 01:05:57.440
person nature and mode. It's very
important for Trinitarian theology to make a distinction

840
01:05:57.519 --> 01:06:02.519
between hypostasis nature person nature and mode
or trope boasts. Mode is the way

841
01:06:02.519 --> 01:06:06.519
that a thing exists. Islamic theology
is kind of all over the place,

842
01:06:06.559 --> 01:06:10.840
and they use modality in a lot
of different ways. It's kind of unclear

843
01:06:10.880 --> 01:06:15.360
and contradictory between different Islamic fingers as
to what exactly they think modality means.

844
01:06:15.599 --> 01:06:20.440
Sometimes it relates to parts whole relationships, sometimes it means relation to other objects,

845
01:06:20.599 --> 01:06:24.960
and sometimes it means the actual way
that the mode in which it exists,

846
01:06:24.960 --> 01:06:28.360
the way a thing exists, or
how it exists. So in Orthodox

847
01:06:28.400 --> 01:06:33.199
theology, we're using it in that
sense of how a thing exists. Hardly

848
01:06:33.320 --> 01:06:40.039
missed the reminder today so much.
We're going to kick it over to or

849
01:06:40.199 --> 01:06:43.599
changing it up in the format.
We're now going to the three sets of

850
01:06:43.760 --> 01:06:48.400
seven minute cross examinations. This is
going to be more formal for a cross

851
01:06:48.400 --> 01:06:53.320
examinations, folks. So we are
looking for just questions on one side and

852
01:06:53.440 --> 01:06:57.199
just question or just answers on the
other side. With that, Jake,

853
01:06:57.239 --> 01:07:04.039
the floor is yours to interrogate Jay
right now. Okay, just give me

854
01:07:04.079 --> 01:07:10.599
one second because I'm starting my timer
here. Okay, I'm ready, Jay.

855
01:07:10.760 --> 01:07:14.719
So you said that you're wondering where
did I get this idea that the

856
01:07:14.760 --> 01:07:18.079
divine essence is a universal So let
me read you from your good friend doctor

857
01:07:18.079 --> 01:07:24.880
Bo Branson and his PhD dissertation on
page one sixty eight on the section four

858
01:07:24.920 --> 01:07:30.119
point two point one USSII and Hypothesis
in Gregory of Nissa on Universals, Richard

859
01:07:30.199 --> 01:07:35.519
Cross argues persuasively in my view,
that Saint Gregory and Saint Basil both used

860
01:07:35.519 --> 01:07:42.760
the term usia synonymously with nature,
and they conceive of this as a universal.

861
01:07:43.039 --> 01:07:45.599
And then in the rest of the
section he goes on to explain just

862
01:07:45.760 --> 01:07:51.320
that that the divine essence is conceived
of as a universal by the Cappadocians.

863
01:07:51.559 --> 01:07:54.760
So what do you have to say
in response to your buddy saying that,

864
01:07:55.159 --> 01:07:59.360
yeah, the zach Kuber book actually
treats this, that the notion of universal

865
01:08:00.039 --> 01:08:02.960
evolves over time between the way the
cabin Doosians use it in the way that

866
01:08:02.960 --> 01:08:08.719
the post Chalcedonian Fathers use it up
in the John Damascus, in Saint Maximus.

867
01:08:09.039 --> 01:08:14.559
So what's relevant for our debate in
terms of human universals is not whether

868
01:08:14.639 --> 01:08:17.840
or not God's essence is common,
but whether or not there are created universals.

869
01:08:17.840 --> 01:08:21.640
So that's what I was talking.
But my question, my question is

870
01:08:21.680 --> 01:08:27.119
does bo Branson believe in this passage
and what he argues for in his dissertation

871
01:08:27.399 --> 01:08:30.560
that the divine essence is a universal? Yes or no? You're equivocating on

872
01:08:30.600 --> 01:08:34.279
the term universal. Does he say
that the divine essence is a universal?

873
01:08:34.479 --> 01:08:39.840
You're equivocating on the term universal.
Okay, so you want to you want

874
01:08:39.880 --> 01:08:42.840
to move on, I'm going to
move universe only has one. I'm going

875
01:08:42.880 --> 01:08:45.199
to move on because it's it only
has one sc It's clear to the audience

876
01:08:45.239 --> 01:08:48.600
that you can't say that. Now
let's move on to the LPT. You

877
01:08:48.680 --> 01:08:55.079
claim that I am counting by division
within God. Explain how I'm counting by

878
01:08:55.119 --> 01:09:00.279
division within God? When you use
the term insufarable, I use the term

879
01:09:00.359 --> 01:09:06.439
inseparable means that I'm separation. Well
am I using that to count? Well?

880
01:09:06.479 --> 01:09:12.439
You said that the attributes are inseparable
exactly, But how many attributes are

881
01:09:12.439 --> 01:09:15.720
there? Are there one or money? Well? Is God's essence one?

882
01:09:17.199 --> 01:09:21.319
How many attributes are there? One
or many? According to my position?

883
01:09:21.800 --> 01:09:26.640
You have believe many? Okay,
there are many, and yet they're inseparable.

884
01:09:27.000 --> 01:09:30.920
So if they're inseparable from each other
and there's many, how am I

885
01:09:30.039 --> 01:09:33.520
counting by division? Genius? No, in terms of the essence, you

886
01:09:33.520 --> 01:09:36.439
count by division by saying that it's
one. Oh, there's one essence.

887
01:09:38.439 --> 01:09:44.760
That's where where is it? Where
is there accounting by division? There is

888
01:09:44.800 --> 01:09:46.520
none? Okay, exactly. It
doesn't mean that you're It doesn't mean that

889
01:09:46.560 --> 01:09:54.439
you're saying huge. It doesn't mean
you don't even understand the basics of this

890
01:09:54.520 --> 01:09:58.960
conversation. Let's do about let's let's
let's move on. You don't understand the

891
01:09:59.319 --> 01:10:03.399
now, let's get to some other
issues. What is the difference between tefweed

892
01:10:03.479 --> 01:10:09.159
and manna and tea. I don't
know your terms. You don't know,

893
01:10:10.079 --> 01:10:13.760
so you have no idea what that
means. Okay, and yet you think

894
01:10:13.800 --> 01:10:21.000
you're able to critique our position when
these are basic terms. Exactly. No,

895
01:10:21.079 --> 01:10:26.079
But even when I'm critiquing the trinity, I'm aware of the basic terms

896
01:10:26.359 --> 01:10:30.359
of what a hypostasis is. That
is, I'm under I understand the basics.

897
01:10:32.279 --> 01:10:35.039
This is a debate about the fact
that you're ignorant of our tradition.

898
01:10:35.119 --> 01:10:40.039
Thank you very much. Now let's
move on to next And let's move on

899
01:10:40.079 --> 01:10:44.720
to the next question. Why is
it problematic to believe that the persons are

900
01:10:44.720 --> 01:10:47.720
identical to the essence as Thomas aquinas
in many Catholics hold. Why is that

901
01:10:47.760 --> 01:10:54.560
problematic because it basically ends up in
reducing person to nature, and it would

902
01:10:54.560 --> 01:11:00.279
be modalism. Okay, So would
you consider that position heretical, Yeah,

903
01:11:00.319 --> 01:11:03.760
if you mean identity in the sense
of reductionist identity. Okay. So the

904
01:11:03.840 --> 01:11:08.840
trinity, if you conceive of when
you say the Father is God, that

905
01:11:08.880 --> 01:11:13.880
the Father is identical to God,
would you agree that that's logically problematic because

906
01:11:13.880 --> 01:11:17.000
then it would follow that the Father
is identical to the Son. Well,

907
01:11:17.119 --> 01:11:21.239
identity can be the sense of is
an identity or a predication? Yeah,

908
01:11:21.239 --> 01:11:26.079
I'm saying, and the Catholics make
it explicit. There's there's no difference between

909
01:11:26.079 --> 01:11:30.079
the person and the nature in terms
of the Tonists, So they say the

910
01:11:30.159 --> 01:11:33.840
Father is identical to the nature or
essence, and so are the Son in

911
01:11:33.840 --> 01:11:39.239
the Holy Spirit, which, by
the logic of identity, would follow that

912
01:11:39.319 --> 01:11:42.319
the Father, Son, and Holy
Spirit are identical to each other. Do

913
01:11:42.359 --> 01:11:45.800
you agree with that critique that you
could make that argument. That's why I

914
01:11:45.800 --> 01:11:50.239
said modalism. You know, yes, I do know. You're just asking

915
01:11:51.800 --> 01:11:56.000
no because I want to. I
want you to be more explicit, but

916
01:11:56.079 --> 01:11:59.119
I'm supposed to ask questions, not
you. Thank you very much. Now,

917
01:11:59.159 --> 01:12:02.439
how many persons are there in the
trinity three? Are they separated by

918
01:12:02.439 --> 01:12:06.920
time or space? No, So
you count the persons by identity and not

919
01:12:08.000 --> 01:12:13.560
division, right? Correct? Okay? Does God have one eternal attribute or

920
01:12:13.680 --> 01:12:17.520
energy or more than one? More
than one? Are his eternal attributes separated

921
01:12:17.520 --> 01:12:21.520
from each other by time or space? No? Okay, so you count

922
01:12:21.560 --> 01:12:28.920
the attributes by identity and not division, right? Correct? Okay, So

923
01:12:29.000 --> 01:12:31.720
if we count gods in the trinity
by the same method of identity, how

924
01:12:31.720 --> 01:12:38.279
many gods would we count depends on
what God picks out. If we're talking

925
01:12:38.319 --> 01:12:43.560
about the persons three, So there
would be three gods if we counted by

926
01:12:43.600 --> 01:12:47.880
identity and the same method that we
count the attributes are eternal energies and the

927
01:12:47.920 --> 01:12:55.399
person's correct, right, Okay,
your friend Bo Banson said, Okay,

928
01:12:55.439 --> 01:12:57.920
so your friend, so there would
be three little g gods. Thank you.

929
01:12:57.920 --> 01:13:00.680
Your friend Bo Branson says that today
we count by identity, So that

930
01:13:00.720 --> 01:13:04.159
would mean by the standard way in
which we count today, there would be

931
01:13:04.199 --> 01:13:09.279
three gods in the trinity. Correct. The way that we count today is

932
01:13:09.279 --> 01:13:14.520
talking about post frago. Okay,
So I'm gonna quo what he says.

933
01:13:14.560 --> 01:13:18.079
I'm gonna quote what So today we
count want to answer it the day we

934
01:13:18.119 --> 01:13:20.680
count No, I'm answering. I'm
going to give you more you're answering.

935
01:13:20.880 --> 01:13:27.239
You're answering today as the question,
we count f's by one logical subjects that

936
01:13:27.279 --> 01:13:30.439
are discernible from or at least not
identical to one another, and our F

937
01:13:30.800 --> 01:13:34.279
that is X and y orff.
If X and Y are different in any

938
01:13:34.279 --> 01:13:38.880
way and are both fish, we
count them as two f's. So that's

939
01:13:38.880 --> 01:13:43.720
in his explanation that we count today
by identity. Yet you're quoting these other

940
01:13:43.760 --> 01:13:47.279
sources, which is not even my
argument. My argument is that you're inconsistent

941
01:13:47.319 --> 01:13:53.439
in your methodology. So do you
have if you think no, no,

942
01:13:53.439 --> 01:13:59.119
no, it's not about one counting
what is already I got to I've got

943
01:13:59.119 --> 01:14:01.640
to see if you can ask a
question, Jake, just to keep it

944
01:14:01.640 --> 01:14:04.000
as strict as well, I'm gonna
ask you a question, what is the

945
01:14:04.159 --> 01:14:10.199
justification or argument for why we must
count persons and attributes in God by identity

946
01:14:10.399 --> 01:14:14.520
but count God's by another method other
than simply trying to avoid that you're a

947
01:14:14.520 --> 01:14:17.920
polytheist. By the example that I
gave from first order and second order in

948
01:14:18.000 --> 01:14:21.960
position in the way that all of
the ancient world counted, So there is

949
01:14:23.000 --> 01:14:28.439
no justification. You're not asking why
we count the attributes and the persons by

950
01:14:28.479 --> 01:14:32.479
identity, but we count because different
things, because what you can't understand is

951
01:14:32.520 --> 01:14:40.760
a different I'll give you exactly I
got you. I'll give you a chance

952
01:14:40.840 --> 01:14:43.039
to answer the question, j and
then I've got to wrap us up.

953
01:14:44.199 --> 01:14:45.520
Can I answer what he asked?
He just talked the all time, and

954
01:14:45.520 --> 01:14:48.000
then let me answer. You can
answer, You can answer the last question

955
01:14:48.000 --> 01:14:53.199
he asked. Yeah, so different
things are counted in different ways. That's

956
01:14:53.319 --> 01:14:57.479
what I argued. And I argue
that from my opening statement, your argument

957
01:14:57.560 --> 01:15:00.479
hinges on only counting in one way, and you're taken out of context the

958
01:15:00.479 --> 01:15:05.199
fact that doctor Branson said that most
people today post Frega think of counting in

959
01:15:05.239 --> 01:15:09.159
one way, when this is a
dispute about the way the people in the

960
01:15:09.199 --> 01:15:13.920
ancient medieval world counted, which is
not by strictly by identity. We'll jump

961
01:15:13.920 --> 01:15:18.079
into the seven minutes of Jay interrogating
Jake. The floor is all yours,

962
01:15:18.199 --> 01:15:23.640
Jay, Jake, you said that
you do have you're happy to affirm this

963
01:15:23.720 --> 01:15:30.119
sort of empiricist nominalist position, and
that seems to necessitate the idea that all

964
01:15:30.159 --> 01:15:34.600
of the knowledge that we have comes
from either sense data or relations of ideas.

965
01:15:35.000 --> 01:15:40.079
I'm just curious if you think that
the peripatetic axiom itself is found in

966
01:15:40.159 --> 01:15:43.399
sense data. That's not my position. When did I ever say that I'm

967
01:15:43.399 --> 01:15:46.600
an empiricist. Well, if you're
a nominalist, you're an empiricist. How

968
01:15:46.640 --> 01:15:53.159
does that follow? Well, so
you disagree with what most people in your

969
01:15:53.159 --> 01:15:59.319
tradition. No, so you're not
an impurist. I'm not an empiricist by

970
01:15:59.359 --> 01:16:01.600
the standard you just laid out.
Well, so you don't think the knowledge

971
01:16:01.600 --> 01:16:04.920
comes from sense data. I do, but I don't think it's limited to

972
01:16:04.960 --> 01:16:08.520
sense data. I didn't limit it
to that, I said. Also,

973
01:16:09.119 --> 01:16:12.199
I said relations of ideas. Yeah, I don't think it's limited to those

974
01:16:12.199 --> 01:16:14.880
two. Okay, where else do
we? Where else does knowledge come from?

975
01:16:15.720 --> 01:16:18.279
And that is what do you know
what it is? No? I

976
01:16:18.279 --> 01:16:21.399
don't. That's why I asked you. Okay, well, similar kind of

977
01:16:21.439 --> 01:16:27.880
similar to your concept of the news. So direct perception of God? Yes,

978
01:16:28.800 --> 01:16:31.039
how do you directly perceive God?
As given to me? It says

979
01:16:31.039 --> 01:16:36.680
God cannot be seen? What do
you mean he says God cannot be seen?

980
01:16:36.720 --> 01:16:43.119
Of course God can be seen.
How can God be seen? How

981
01:16:43.159 --> 01:16:46.920
can God be seen? I guess
Jay, you're not familiar with That's why

982
01:16:47.000 --> 01:16:54.960
we're asking you. We're asking you
that I'm asking you, and yes,

983
01:16:55.000 --> 01:16:58.199
he is. It's showing that your
ignorance, that you don't even know.

984
01:17:00.000 --> 01:17:01.680
I think I'm ignorant. So that's
why you get. You get the chance

985
01:17:01.720 --> 01:17:05.439
to enlighten us. I'm trying to
soldier. If you slow down, Soldier,

986
01:17:05.479 --> 01:17:11.479
I will yes the eyes. If
you allow me to talk, I'll

987
01:17:11.479 --> 01:17:15.199
tell you by the beatific vision.
We believe in the afterlife that we do

988
01:17:15.279 --> 01:17:18.640
see God with the eyes? Correct, has anybody in this life seen God?

989
01:17:19.119 --> 01:17:23.560
No? Does God have a physical
with the eyes? Not with the

990
01:17:23.600 --> 01:17:27.640
eyes? Does God have a physical
form? Define what you mean by physical

991
01:17:28.199 --> 01:17:30.640
the body parts that are listed.
We don't believe God has body parts?

992
01:17:30.680 --> 01:17:34.920
Now, well, you believe he
has a foot, right, we believe,

993
01:17:35.000 --> 01:17:38.119
Yes, we do believe he has
a foot. We believe his hand.

994
01:17:38.239 --> 01:17:42.399
What is a foot that's nothing like
a created foot? What is a

995
01:17:42.439 --> 01:17:45.840
foot that's nothing like a created foot? The same thing, the same thing

996
01:17:45.920 --> 01:17:49.000
that an essence is, that's nothing
like a created essence. Yeah, but

997
01:17:49.039 --> 01:17:55.640
our argument is not based on analogy
for essence, I'm saying that any predicate

998
01:17:55.680 --> 01:17:59.640
that we ascribe to God in creation, there is a similarity in meaning.

999
01:18:00.079 --> 01:18:02.840
But it doesn't follow from that that
there what's that? What's that similarity meaning?

1000
01:18:03.680 --> 01:18:08.560
Let me finish, does not follow
from that that there is a similarity

1001
01:18:08.720 --> 01:18:12.600
in ontology, which I completely I
understand. No, I understand that that's

1002
01:18:12.640 --> 01:18:14.920
the to me a position. So
I'm asking, what is this, what's

1003
01:18:14.920 --> 01:18:17.680
the problem with it? What is
the similarity? What is the similarity in

1004
01:18:17.760 --> 01:18:20.800
terms of the meaning, and what
is that you're just saying? Meaning?

1005
01:18:20.920 --> 01:18:25.159
What is so? We know it
based on the text. So if you

1006
01:18:25.199 --> 01:18:27.840
go to the example, if you
go to the example, is all that

1007
01:18:27.920 --> 01:18:31.600
empirical derived? If you if you
allow me to finish, if you go

1008
01:18:31.720 --> 01:18:36.640
to the text that describe the yed
or the foot, for example, the

1009
01:18:36.720 --> 01:18:43.600
hands are described as being responsible for
directly creating Adam. So this is how

1010
01:18:43.680 --> 01:18:48.319
we understand the meanings of the text
attributes in context. So you reference another

1011
01:18:48.359 --> 01:18:55.239
created object, right, what's the
creative object the text? Now, the

1012
01:18:55.279 --> 01:18:58.560
text is not created. The text
that you read is created. Right,

1013
01:18:59.279 --> 01:19:01.399
the papers and the ink is yeah, exactly, that's the papers. The

1014
01:19:01.439 --> 01:19:04.720
papers in the ink. But the
words are called the text. I know

1015
01:19:04.760 --> 01:19:08.359
you're talking about the eternal Krean.
That's not what I'm talking I'm not talking

1016
01:19:08.359 --> 01:19:10.600
about. I don't even believe in
an eternal Koran. What are you talking

1017
01:19:10.600 --> 01:19:15.600
about? So the text that you
derived that knowledge from is empirical, right,

1018
01:19:16.600 --> 01:19:19.760
the text that I derived I don't
understand that. Yeah, you don't

1019
01:19:19.800 --> 01:19:23.520
understand the question exactly, No,
I don't. It doesn't make any sense.

1020
01:19:23.840 --> 01:19:28.000
Yeah, you think I believe you
don't empirically read the You don't empirically

1021
01:19:28.000 --> 01:19:30.720
read the Krin? Yes we do. That was the question I asked you.

1022
01:19:30.720 --> 01:19:32.920
So you do we read? You
did understand it. You just didn't

1023
01:19:32.920 --> 01:19:35.359
want to ask You didn't want to
answer. You understood them. No,

1024
01:19:38.279 --> 01:19:43.720
you're to ask you appropriate questions.
I asked you that, Yeah, you

1025
01:19:43.760 --> 01:19:45.720
think I believe in an eternal Kuran? Where does it say that in the

1026
01:19:45.720 --> 01:19:49.560
book you read? I'm asking you
about your empiricism what you don't want to

1027
01:19:49.600 --> 01:19:54.079
talk about? And you said that
very What is a created foot? What

1028
01:19:54.159 --> 01:19:56.800
is that? What is a foot
that's nothing like a created foot? And

1029
01:19:56.840 --> 01:19:59.319
I explained it to you? Did
I explained it to you? I said,

1030
01:19:59.319 --> 01:20:03.159
I said no to these texts.
I said, known through the text

1031
01:20:03.760 --> 01:20:08.239
right, which is a circle of
empirical sense data, which is what I'm

1032
01:20:08.279 --> 01:20:11.560
asking you. What's what's the circle? How do we know? How do

1033
01:20:11.640 --> 01:20:15.600
we know to another empirical piece of
data, to another empirical piece of data.

1034
01:20:15.640 --> 01:20:18.399
You can never get out of this
loop. That's why that's a problem

1035
01:20:18.399 --> 01:20:21.279
for empiricism. No, it's not, because it's the same thing when it

1036
01:20:21.319 --> 01:20:30.159
comes to divine revelation according to the
Orthodox how do you know about it's do

1037
01:20:30.199 --> 01:20:36.319
you know about trinity? You know
about the moderator, he doesn't answer the

1038
01:20:36.399 --> 01:20:45.119
questions you're complaining to the one second
hold on, I asked, I can

1039
01:20:45.159 --> 01:20:49.359
answer the questions. However, James, I'm asking. I asked about his

1040
01:20:49.479 --> 01:20:54.079
position, and he said your view
of divine revelation. That's a two quot

1041
01:20:54.119 --> 01:20:57.560
way. I'm asking about his position, which he won't explain, Okay,

1042
01:20:57.640 --> 01:21:01.000
James, whether or not my response
as a fallacy is for the audience to

1043
01:21:01.079 --> 01:21:06.359
decide. Moderators are I can?
I can, and I can answer,

1044
01:21:06.359 --> 01:21:12.560
and I can say you're not answering, I can, I can. I

1045
01:21:12.560 --> 01:21:15.800
can give any answer I want.
Yeah, exactly minutes left in the section

1046
01:21:15.960 --> 01:21:20.479
I can give, which is what
you're doing exactly. I'm answering your question.

1047
01:21:20.560 --> 01:21:25.800
You just don't like the answer,
saying anything, Just one last,

1048
01:21:26.039 --> 01:21:29.319
one last, just to be sure
I understand the question, Jay, if

1049
01:21:29.359 --> 01:21:31.439
you can ask you more time for
me? Right? So I asked for

1050
01:21:31.640 --> 01:21:35.680
his basis for knowing what the Koran
teaches, which is empirical sense data.

1051
01:21:35.920 --> 01:21:39.479
And I'm trying to get at the
point that he can never get out of

1052
01:21:39.520 --> 01:21:43.359
the domain, the veil of empirical
sense data to ever actually know anything about

1053
01:21:43.359 --> 01:21:46.640
a law himself, because much like
the Tomas position, he's stuck in only

1054
01:21:46.720 --> 01:21:50.840
seeing and interacting with creative effects.
So I'm trying to figure out He says,

1055
01:21:50.840 --> 01:21:55.680
well, in the future there will
be this direct perception of Allah in

1056
01:21:55.720 --> 01:21:58.720
the beativic vision, and I'm asking
about the here and the now, how

1057
01:21:58.720 --> 01:22:00.960
do you ever get out of the
box of the challenge of human skepticism.

1058
01:22:01.119 --> 01:22:05.680
Yeah, and I'm saying that we
have a direct possession, a direct experience

1059
01:22:05.720 --> 01:22:10.800
of God right now through the concept
of the fit thraw, which I explained.

1060
01:22:10.960 --> 01:22:13.359
But since you don't even know what
it is, it's no surprise that

1061
01:22:13.399 --> 01:22:16.279
you don't explain what it is.
So you're just I did I gave you

1062
01:22:16.359 --> 01:22:21.960
a corollary within orthodox theology, where
I explained that it's similar to the concept

1063
01:22:23.000 --> 01:22:28.119
of news, where there is a
direct experience direct no no, no no

1064
01:22:28.279 --> 01:22:30.840
no, yes you did no no
no. You're confusing a scene God with

1065
01:22:30.920 --> 01:22:35.560
a direct experience of God. Those
are not the same thing. Yes,

1066
01:22:35.600 --> 01:22:41.399
there's a direct experience of God right
now. That is not through some inferential

1067
01:22:41.479 --> 01:22:45.359
process. It's not based on argumentation. But we are at the end of

1068
01:22:45.399 --> 01:22:48.199
the seven minutes for that section.
We might have to come back to this

1069
01:22:48.800 --> 01:22:54.399
and the next set, but sure, I have the clock set for seven

1070
01:22:54.479 --> 01:22:59.800
minutes for you, Jake to interpret
j Okay, give me one second interrogate,

1071
01:23:00.199 --> 01:23:03.880
interpret it. Well, I got
to interpret what he's saying. But

1072
01:23:03.960 --> 01:23:13.039
hold on a second. Let me
just get my thing here. Okay,

1073
01:23:13.119 --> 01:23:16.439
all right, I'm ready whenever you
are. James ready, Okay, all

1074
01:23:16.520 --> 01:23:20.800
right, Jay, we're back at
it again. Let's go to the next

1075
01:23:20.840 --> 01:23:30.239
issue. All right, How many
men are on this stage right now between

1076
01:23:30.359 --> 01:23:34.640
Jake, James and Jay. None, because we're not on a stage.

1077
01:23:35.239 --> 01:23:42.039
Okay, on this platform, three
there's three men? Okay, how come

1078
01:23:42.119 --> 01:23:46.079
you don't count the same way in
which Gregory of this accounts Peter James and

1079
01:23:46.159 --> 01:23:50.399
John three men in his work on
not three Gods when he says that there's

1080
01:23:50.439 --> 01:23:55.680
only one man, because I already
explained different things are counted different ways,

1081
01:23:55.720 --> 01:24:00.399
and you're counting three men as saying
there three men, but Gregory of Nisa

1082
01:24:00.399 --> 01:24:03.359
accounts them as one man. Well, they're one in terms of nature,

1083
01:24:04.920 --> 01:24:11.119
and Gregory says that it's more appropriate
to call them one man, and that

1084
01:24:11.279 --> 01:24:15.920
actually our way of calling them three
men is incorrect, so it's better to

1085
01:24:15.319 --> 01:24:19.239
change that than to call the persons
of the Trinity three gods. That's his

1086
01:24:19.399 --> 01:24:24.840
entire argument. So by you saying
that there's three men here, you're actually

1087
01:24:24.920 --> 01:24:28.840
disagreeing. No, it's just two
different senses of the same word, which

1088
01:24:28.840 --> 01:24:32.520
you constantly equivocate on. Okay.
Richard Cartwright says on this passage, it

1089
01:24:32.560 --> 01:24:36.119
seems to have been left to Gregory
of Nissa, Basil's younger brother, to

1090
01:24:36.239 --> 01:24:42.800
notice that thus understood consumstantiality of the
Father, Son and Holy Spirit appears to

1091
01:24:42.960 --> 01:24:48.119
license saying that there are three gods. Gregory himself rather desperately suggested that strictly

1092
01:24:48.199 --> 01:24:53.479
speaking, there is only one man. So do you agree that there's three

1093
01:24:53.520 --> 01:24:58.720
men on this platform or one.
There's one man, there's one human nature.

1094
01:24:58.880 --> 01:25:00.239
In that sense, man can be
pick out nature, which is a

1095
01:25:00.279 --> 01:25:05.640
common thing, and there's three men
as individuated. Okay, Gregory says about

1096
01:25:05.680 --> 01:25:10.439
the logical problem of the Trinity,
He says, this question, which was

1097
01:25:10.520 --> 01:25:15.039
asked to him by another bishop,
is very difficult to deal with. If

1098
01:25:15.039 --> 01:25:18.479
we should be able to find anything
that may give support to the uncertainty of

1099
01:25:18.520 --> 01:25:23.399
our mind, so that it may
longer totter and waver in this monstrous dilemma,

1100
01:25:23.640 --> 01:25:26.720
it would be well. On the
other hand, even if our reasoning

1101
01:25:26.840 --> 01:25:31.000
found unequal to the problem, we
must keep forever firm and unmoved the tradition

1102
01:25:31.159 --> 01:25:35.560
with which we received by succession from
the fathers. So Gregory is saying that

1103
01:25:35.600 --> 01:25:41.039
the problem is difficult. Do you
agree with that? Depending upon how you

1104
01:25:41.079 --> 01:25:44.520
cash it out. If you think
that the logical problem of trinity is identical

1105
01:25:44.560 --> 01:25:48.000
to the Aryan disputes, then you're
engaging in anacronism. This isn't about an

1106
01:25:48.159 --> 01:25:53.399
Aryan dispute. This is specifically where
he sets up the problem in his work

1107
01:25:53.479 --> 01:25:58.199
on not Three Gods and responding to
a blabbyist, where he's asking him,

1108
01:25:58.359 --> 01:26:01.680
well, we say to your Father's
son, holy Spirit or each god forbid.

1109
01:26:01.920 --> 01:26:05.279
We forbid men to say that there
are three gods. So this is

1110
01:26:05.319 --> 01:26:10.720
the very problem of tritheism. No, we forget, we forbid three gods?

1111
01:26:10.720 --> 01:26:13.920
If you mean three natures? Okay, so here we go. Next

1112
01:26:14.039 --> 01:26:17.119
question, do you understand you?
According to you, the Father has the

1113
01:26:17.279 --> 01:26:23.159
power to cause another divine person and
alone causes the Son and the Holy spir

1114
01:26:23.600 --> 01:26:27.479
already answer this, or the son? Do the Son and Holy Spirit have

1115
01:26:27.600 --> 01:26:31.920
the power to cause another divine person? You're equivocating on power. Power is

1116
01:26:31.960 --> 01:26:34.680
not an energy? Do the son? I didn't ask about energy? Do

1117
01:26:34.800 --> 01:26:40.359
the Son? And Holism is saying
that, do the Son and Holy Spirit

1118
01:26:40.439 --> 01:26:45.000
have the ability to cause another divine
person? Causing a divine person is not

1119
01:26:45.079 --> 01:26:48.319
an energy. Do they have the
ability to cause another divine person? No?

1120
01:26:48.840 --> 01:26:53.039
Okay, they don't. Thank you. If no, then do they

1121
01:26:53.039 --> 01:26:58.439
have the same power? That's only
if power is viewed as an energy.

1122
01:26:58.600 --> 01:27:01.000
And I just argue that the power
that we're talking about here is not really

1123
01:27:01.239 --> 01:27:05.079
correctly called power. It's called begetting. Okay, But it has to do

1124
01:27:05.199 --> 01:27:10.000
with an action, doesn't it.
Well, it's act in a different sense

1125
01:27:10.039 --> 01:27:14.920
than energy, and that's what athens. Yeah, I'm not asking about energy.

1126
01:27:15.359 --> 01:27:21.359
I'm asking about the argument. What
power is what an agent is able

1127
01:27:21.439 --> 01:27:25.680
to do? Do you agree powers? No, there's multiple senses to the

1128
01:27:25.680 --> 01:27:29.039
word power. Okay, so when
I say that God is all powerful,

1129
01:27:29.359 --> 01:27:32.520
I mean that he can do whatever
is medical first, actuality, second actuality.

1130
01:27:32.560 --> 01:27:41.000
And there's a let me finish.
I didn't ask you a question yet,

1131
01:27:40.279 --> 01:27:45.399
I'm explaining to explaining to you what
the understanding of power is I'm giving.

1132
01:27:45.880 --> 01:27:49.760
Don't you don't know that. You
don't know my definition of power.

1133
01:27:49.960 --> 01:27:58.239
I don't my definition. My definition
of power is whatever whatever a being can

1134
01:27:58.279 --> 01:28:04.079
possibly do. Now I'm asking does
the son have the same ability to do

1135
01:28:04.159 --> 01:28:09.199
whatever the father can do? Yes? Or no? It's it's equivocating on

1136
01:28:09.239 --> 01:28:13.800
the word power. I just gave
you the definition of power. That's your

1137
01:28:13.800 --> 01:28:17.479
definition. I don't exactly definition.
So you understand that every argument that you

1138
01:28:17.520 --> 01:28:21.479
make where you reduce words to having
a single definition, just restate your position.

1139
01:28:21.640 --> 01:28:25.680
So that's why it doesn't. It
doesn't. Oh, it doesn't because

1140
01:28:25.720 --> 01:28:30.399
the capsule you're not interested in our
This might be a good opportunity to it

1141
01:28:30.399 --> 01:28:32.720
could be that, h Jay,
if you want to answer it according to

1142
01:28:32.760 --> 01:28:35.680
your own definition of power, and
you can share that definition and then if

1143
01:28:35.680 --> 01:28:42.600
you're willing to humor Jake's question using
Jake's definition of power. Right, So

1144
01:28:42.720 --> 01:28:45.840
Jake wants a single definition of what
power is according to what he says it

1145
01:28:45.920 --> 01:28:49.119
is, and if he's going to
critique our position, then it needs to

1146
01:28:49.159 --> 01:28:55.479
be our understanding of first actuality,
second actuality, which we ascribe to God.

1147
01:28:55.520 --> 01:28:59.319
And there's different senses to power.
I can have power as a potentiality

1148
01:28:59.319 --> 01:29:01.760
that I possess that I don't actualize. I could also have power as an

1149
01:29:01.800 --> 01:29:09.439
actualized energy that I'm engaging in or
sometimes in the sense of Athanasians talking about

1150
01:29:09.439 --> 01:29:13.079
the Father begetting. He says,
you could call this an act, but

1151
01:29:13.119 --> 01:29:15.439
it's not acting the same way that
God has a triad act in terms of

1152
01:29:15.439 --> 01:29:21.520
the energies. So Jake's argument hinges
on reducing the word act to having one

1153
01:29:21.560 --> 01:29:25.279
sense in God, and we simply
don't have that view. Okay, that's

1154
01:29:25.319 --> 01:29:28.359
not my argument, but let's move
on. That's what you argue. Let's

1155
01:29:28.399 --> 01:29:31.239
move on to the next question here. You're moving on because it doesn't work,

1156
01:29:31.279 --> 01:29:35.239
does the Father No, because you've
already been refuted, does the does

1157
01:29:35.239 --> 01:29:42.279
the Father have the ability to become
incarnate? We're not told that, so

1158
01:29:42.359 --> 01:29:45.680
you don't know. You're agnostic on
the proposition. Well, there's nothing about

1159
01:29:45.720 --> 01:29:46.920
that, so there's no one I'm
asking you, do you know about it

1160
01:29:47.039 --> 01:29:50.359
or not? Can the Father become
a garnet? So you're not even letting

1161
01:29:50.359 --> 01:29:55.000
me answer, you're just immediately putting
off. I just simply said, there's

1162
01:29:55.000 --> 01:29:58.640
not any information about that. And
the way that Jesus speaks is that no

1163
01:29:58.640 --> 01:30:00.159
one has seen the Father at any
time, so there's no incarnation of them.

1164
01:30:00.359 --> 01:30:03.800
Okay, So people have interpreted.
John of Damascus is arguing that the

1165
01:30:03.840 --> 01:30:09.680
Father cannot be incarnate when he says
in his Exposition of Orthodox Faith Book four,

1166
01:30:10.159 --> 01:30:13.399
the Father is the Father and not
the Son. The Son is son

1167
01:30:13.439 --> 01:30:16.000
and not father. The Holy Spirit
is spirit and not father or son or

1168
01:30:16.079 --> 01:30:21.199
father or son. For the individuality
is unchangeable. How indeed could the individuality

1169
01:30:21.239 --> 01:30:26.720
continue to exist at all if it
were ever changing and altering? Wherefore,

1170
01:30:26.760 --> 01:30:30.680
the Son of God became son of
man in order that his individuality might endure.

1171
01:30:30.840 --> 01:30:35.439
So he's arguing that this must include
that the Son only can become incarnate

1172
01:30:35.600 --> 01:30:41.039
in order for the individuality of the
distinctions between the persons. So do you

1173
01:30:41.079 --> 01:30:45.520
agree with that interpretation the individual?
Jay? And then we've actually just hit

1174
01:30:45.600 --> 01:30:47.399
the seven minutes. I'm just asking
do you agree with that interpretation? That's

1175
01:30:47.439 --> 01:30:53.159
all? It's the individuality of the
persons as known by us, So has

1176
01:30:53.199 --> 01:30:58.319
not the incarnation? Is not what
lets us know or what conditions the distinctions

1177
01:30:58.319 --> 01:31:01.359
and the triad. We'll kick it
over to Jay for his seven minutes to

1178
01:31:01.560 --> 01:31:06.960
interrogate Jake before is yours? Jake? Earlier when you were talking about your

1179
01:31:08.039 --> 01:31:12.479
view of epistemology and whatnot, do
you agree with the position of even to

1180
01:31:12.600 --> 01:31:15.319
me as related on page one ninety
six of the Seleman book, that the

1181
01:31:15.520 --> 01:31:21.119
principles of reasoning are self evident truths. I would have to look at the

1182
01:31:21.159 --> 01:31:27.079
reference, but define self evident,
not relying on anything else to be the

1183
01:31:27.079 --> 01:31:32.960
case, I believe that they are
known directly through the fitthron And that is

1184
01:31:33.000 --> 01:31:39.600
what what I explained before, similar
to the what is what I said I

1185
01:31:39.640 --> 01:31:44.079
explained it before? Similar to the
noose Okay, So every individual in an

1186
01:31:44.119 --> 01:31:47.159
inner sense just knows self evidently that
what the law of logic is true,

1187
01:31:47.199 --> 01:31:51.600
The laws of logic are truth.
He knows that certain principles, like that

1188
01:31:53.079 --> 01:31:56.479
half is less than a whole.
He knows these things directly, not through

1189
01:31:56.520 --> 01:32:00.119
some type of inference. So are
they self evident? Self evident only in

1190
01:32:00.159 --> 01:32:04.760
the sense that he knows them directly
through the fittra. Okay, so they

1191
01:32:04.760 --> 01:32:09.680
don't. They're not from an inference, so they don't rely So they don't

1192
01:32:09.680 --> 01:32:15.039
rely on anything else to be true. They rely on God to exist to

1193
01:32:15.199 --> 01:32:17.680
create us with that faith. I
don't know that that's the case yet,

1194
01:32:17.720 --> 01:32:20.760
So you do you do believe they're
self evident? I know, I said,

1195
01:32:21.479 --> 01:32:27.239
they're not self evident in the sense
that you're to human perception. They're

1196
01:32:27.239 --> 01:32:30.319
not dependent on human perception. There
prior to the didn't say are they dependent?

1197
01:32:30.359 --> 01:32:32.920
I said, are they self evident
to human perception? Self evident in

1198
01:32:33.000 --> 01:32:39.319
the sense that they are known directly
through the fra as an apparatus. Okay,

1199
01:32:39.760 --> 01:32:44.319
So how do we adjudicate between the
things that are self evident and the

1200
01:32:44.359 --> 01:32:49.359
things that aren't. By the fact
of our existence, we know that,

1201
01:32:49.600 --> 01:32:54.319
for example, a half is greater
than a whole, and so that's a

1202
01:32:54.319 --> 01:32:57.520
fallacy. I mean, sorry,
a whole is greater than a half they're

1203
01:32:57.560 --> 01:33:02.319
appealing to. Existence doesn't justify the
truths. I explain to you how it's

1204
01:33:02.359 --> 01:33:09.640
because we know them directly through the
fit throw. So that's no, it

1205
01:33:09.680 --> 01:33:12.720
isn't. I explained how we know
them. You just said we know them

1206
01:33:13.159 --> 01:33:18.000
because we exist and experience them.
I said, I said that we experienced

1207
01:33:18.199 --> 01:33:24.600
them through the apparatus of the fit
throw, which God has created human beings

1208
01:33:24.640 --> 01:33:28.840
upon. Yeah, but how do
we know the difference between those and the

1209
01:33:28.840 --> 01:33:30.039
non self evident truth? Is what
I asked you? He said, by

1210
01:33:30.079 --> 01:33:34.039
existence, because they're self evident,
as you just said. Oh, so

1211
01:33:34.239 --> 01:33:38.960
now you do believe in self evidence
self evident in the sense that they're not

1212
01:33:39.159 --> 01:33:42.640
based upon inference. And how do
we know those distinct from the ones that

1213
01:33:42.680 --> 01:33:45.560
aren't, Because you know when you
make an inference and when you don't,

1214
01:33:45.600 --> 01:33:49.920
and if you don't, then know
reality is reality. So if you get

1215
01:33:50.199 --> 01:33:54.439
do you know the difference between when
you're making an inference? And I'm asking

1216
01:33:54.479 --> 01:33:58.439
you questions, not you exactly.
So I'm telling you we know the difference

1217
01:33:58.479 --> 01:34:00.800
between when we make an inference and
when we don't make an inference. Yeah,

1218
01:34:00.840 --> 01:34:04.640
but that's not answering the question.
I'm asked for the justification for the

1219
01:34:04.680 --> 01:34:09.560
division between the self referential and the
non self referential. What's the justification?

1220
01:34:09.760 --> 01:34:14.039
The justification is that the self referential, which you're talking about, the self

1221
01:34:14.039 --> 01:34:18.319
evident ones, do not rely upon
inference, where others they're self evident because

1222
01:34:18.319 --> 01:34:24.199
they're self evident. That's their self
evident, because they don't reply on inference.

1223
01:34:24.800 --> 01:34:30.159
And because when I make an argument, when I make an argument and

1224
01:34:30.199 --> 01:34:32.880
I appeal to an inference rule,
I know that I'm appealing to an inference

1225
01:34:32.960 --> 01:34:36.279
rule. So there's so that's a
circle. Jake, this is a basic

1226
01:34:36.279 --> 01:34:41.640
epistemology problem for your cicism. Do
you have a question, sir? Exactly,

1227
01:34:42.199 --> 01:34:44.880
you have a question. You're ready
for me to move on. I

1228
01:34:45.000 --> 01:34:46.359
know, I'm asking you if you
have a question, how do we know

1229
01:34:46.399 --> 01:34:51.560
the difference between the self referential?
Already answers already answered your question. You

1230
01:34:51.640 --> 01:34:56.399
just restated that we know. No, you said, how do we know

1231
01:34:56.479 --> 01:34:58.800
that their self? How do we
know the difference? How do we know

1232
01:34:59.119 --> 01:35:01.840
called the criteria problem? No,
how do we know it's called the criteria?

1233
01:35:02.319 --> 01:35:06.199
Are you familiar with the answering?
I'm not answering that I know what

1234
01:35:06.239 --> 01:35:11.760
the criterion problem is. That's my
point. I'm saying to you, that's

1235
01:35:11.800 --> 01:35:15.640
my question. I'm saying to you
that you're asking me, how do I

1236
01:35:15.680 --> 01:35:20.680
know the difference between what's self evident
and what is known? An inference between

1237
01:35:20.720 --> 01:35:26.479
what's not self evident, right,
and the opposite of not being self evident

1238
01:35:26.720 --> 01:35:30.119
is something that is known to So
you're in the criterion problem. It's it.

1239
01:35:32.479 --> 01:35:35.760
I've explained it three times. It's
very you explained it, but it's

1240
01:35:35.800 --> 01:35:39.760
not answering the criterion from you.
We don't know if you don't know the

1241
01:35:39.840 --> 01:35:43.479
difference. Do you know what the
criteria? I already answered that question.

1242
01:35:43.720 --> 01:35:47.399
Do you know what the problem is? I? Do you just explain the

1243
01:35:47.439 --> 01:35:50.800
problem? Moderator. He won't answer. Uh, do you know who's associated

1244
01:35:50.840 --> 01:35:56.399
with it? Who's associated with what? The criteria problem? It's a problem

1245
01:35:56.399 --> 01:36:00.720
in epistemology. Who's associated with it? I don't know who the So it's

1246
01:36:00.800 --> 01:36:03.119
David Chisholm. So how do you
answer their criteria problem? I'm giving you

1247
01:36:03.159 --> 01:36:06.199
an answer. I've been doing it
for the past five minutes, so you'll

1248
01:36:06.239 --> 01:36:14.319
notice. And he doesn't answer the
self evident because it's self evident. No,

1249
01:36:14.359 --> 01:36:16.439
I never said that, Never did
say that. Everybody heard him say

1250
01:36:16.439 --> 01:36:21.479
it's self evident because it exists.
And he said, how do we know?

1251
01:36:21.640 --> 01:36:28.279
And I said, we know it
through a divinely created apparatus. That's

1252
01:36:28.279 --> 01:36:31.199
how we know it. You don't
know this is your starting point. What

1253
01:36:31.279 --> 01:36:34.399
do you mean we're talking about starting
points. You're appealing to divine apparatuses.

1254
01:36:34.399 --> 01:36:39.319
I'm talking about the starting point.
No, I'm saying that that, according

1255
01:36:39.359 --> 01:36:44.319
to our epistemology, the fit thraw
is how we know these things, and

1256
01:36:44.359 --> 01:36:47.399
we know that because it's we're created
upon it. Yeah, but the question

1257
01:36:47.479 --> 01:36:49.960
is about do you know that you're
created that way? And you're just saying,

1258
01:36:49.960 --> 01:36:53.159
well, we're made that way.
That's my question. I'm saying we

1259
01:36:53.199 --> 01:36:57.119
know we're created because we have a
direct experience. No, I'm asking about

1260
01:36:57.199 --> 01:37:00.600
the principles of reason themselves. And
you said you believe in self evidence,

1261
01:37:00.640 --> 01:37:03.079
and then I said okay, And
then I asked you the criterion problem,

1262
01:37:03.199 --> 01:37:06.479
and you haven't answered the criterion problem. You keep talking around it. I've

1263
01:37:06.520 --> 01:37:12.800
answered your question, you have several
times. Your answer was circular. Explain

1264
01:37:12.880 --> 01:37:15.800
the circle because you said that,
well, I know it's self evident because

1265
01:37:15.800 --> 01:37:19.600
it's self evident. And when I'm
not doing something that's an inference, that's

1266
01:37:19.600 --> 01:37:23.600
not answering the criterion. Now you
asked, how how do I know it?

1267
01:37:23.640 --> 01:37:30.600
What's the justification? I asked,
you don't even understand the question question?

1268
01:37:30.640 --> 01:37:34.359
What is the justification for the for
the belief that you know the difference

1269
01:37:34.399 --> 01:37:39.279
between the self evident ones and the
non self evident ones. So the criteria

1270
01:37:39.319 --> 01:37:43.159
problem is saying that you have a
more fundamental criteria by which you cash out

1271
01:37:43.199 --> 01:37:45.319
these two different things and put them
into different classes. How do you know

1272
01:37:45.359 --> 01:37:50.399
that more fundamental Chisholm issue is what
I'm asking. Yeah, and I'm repeating

1273
01:37:50.479 --> 01:37:56.159
the same exact answer. We know
it based on the fact that we are

1274
01:37:56.239 --> 01:38:03.560
created by God with I experience circle. That doesn't That doesn't tell us,

1275
01:38:04.079 --> 01:38:08.760
Jake, that doesn't tell us we
know the fundamental criteria is the case.

1276
01:38:09.720 --> 01:38:12.199
We were out of time. We've
got to kick it over to Jake to

1277
01:38:12.279 --> 01:38:15.880
interrogate ja and this is our final
set. So we'll have one seven minute

1278
01:38:15.880 --> 01:38:24.560
section of Jake interrogating j and then
one last interrogation of j on Jake.

1279
01:38:25.000 --> 01:38:35.399
With that, Jake, the floor
is all yours. OK, sorry about

1280
01:38:35.399 --> 01:38:41.439
that. Just get my notes up
here. No, problem. Folks,

1281
01:38:41.520 --> 01:38:45.960
if you haven't yet, check out
our guests linked below. There's a value

1282
01:38:45.960 --> 01:38:49.119
in hearing their positions firsthand from them. This debate is a great introduction to

1283
01:38:49.159 --> 01:38:54.039
their views. But check out their
channels that includes the podcast. We've linked

1284
01:38:54.039 --> 01:38:59.239
both of our guests below. Okay, I'm ready, ready, Okay,

1285
01:38:59.359 --> 01:39:03.560
Jay? Do you have an argument
or justification for the claim that the Trinity

1286
01:39:03.680 --> 01:39:12.720
and Orthodox theology or the Orthodox Church
specifically is a precondition for rationality, intelligibility

1287
01:39:12.960 --> 01:39:15.840
and all the other transcendental categories?
Do you have an argument justification for that?

1288
01:39:16.439 --> 01:39:18.920
Yes? What is it? It's
a two parter or can I?

1289
01:39:19.079 --> 01:39:21.760
Can I explain it? Yeah?
Go ahead. So the first part is

1290
01:39:21.800 --> 01:39:26.600
that it's a reductio at absurdim argument. When you deny it, this is

1291
01:39:26.640 --> 01:39:30.439
called retortion and Aristotilian argumentation. And
the second part of the argument is to

1292
01:39:30.560 --> 01:39:36.920
posit the Christian worldview as the way
to ground the transcendental categories that are the

1293
01:39:36.960 --> 01:39:43.239
preconditions for all possible knowledge. Yeah, you're saying to posit them. Well,

1294
01:39:43.279 --> 01:39:48.800
what's the justification for the claim that
it is the only system that can

1295
01:39:48.840 --> 01:39:53.520
account for those things? Is there? You provide arguments or not retortion?

1296
01:39:53.840 --> 01:39:57.800
Correct the first. Okay, explain
what retortion is? Do you know,

1297
01:39:58.039 --> 01:40:00.560
you're Jake the Muslim metaphysician, know
what it is. But I've actually seen

1298
01:40:00.600 --> 01:40:05.800
in your I've actually seen in your
videos. You're not asking me questions.

1299
01:40:05.840 --> 01:40:12.199
I'm asking you questions. You've explained
in your videos that you critique the tomists

1300
01:40:12.520 --> 01:40:16.319
when they bring up the issue of
retortion. So can you explain it and

1301
01:40:16.520 --> 01:40:20.279
explain how when they use it?
They're not justified in doing so, but

1302
01:40:20.359 --> 01:40:26.079
you are because they're classical foundationalists like
you, And it's a REDUCTI organ I'm

1303
01:40:26.119 --> 01:40:29.159
not a classical foundational list. Now, it's a reduction. You are.

1304
01:40:29.479 --> 01:40:31.920
You are. I'm not a classical
foundationalist. You are, So you're gonna

1305
01:40:31.920 --> 01:40:39.720
tell me my own epistemology common I'm
not a classical foundationalist the way you just

1306
01:40:39.840 --> 01:40:43.199
argue. Again, I'm gonna ask
you. I'm going to ask you again,

1307
01:40:43.239 --> 01:40:47.920
Doden. I'm asking because you are. I'm asking. I'm asking you

1308
01:40:48.119 --> 01:40:51.800
questions. Yeah, I'm supposed to
be asking him questions. Just to be

1309
01:40:51.840 --> 01:40:56.279
clear. Okay, Jay, again, I'm going to ask you. When

1310
01:40:56.319 --> 01:41:00.640
you critique the tonist, you're saying
the only reason is because they're a classical

1311
01:41:00.680 --> 01:41:06.439
foundationalist and you're not. How does
that affect the legitimacy of them making the

1312
01:41:06.479 --> 01:41:10.640
same move that you are, Because, like you, they don't understand a

1313
01:41:10.680 --> 01:41:15.000
meta level argument. Okay, So
why don't you explain it to us other

1314
01:41:15.039 --> 01:41:17.000
than making a claim? I didn't
make a claim. I said that the

1315
01:41:17.039 --> 01:41:21.079
first part of the argument is reductio
or retortion argument, showing the absurdity of

1316
01:41:21.119 --> 01:41:25.560
that worldview. And then the second
part of the argument is to show and

1317
01:41:25.800 --> 01:41:30.760
argue that only the Orthodox Christian metaphysic, epistemology, and ethic can ground the

1318
01:41:30.840 --> 01:41:34.640
transcendental categories that are the preconditions for
any possible knowledge. Okay, so there's

1319
01:41:34.680 --> 01:41:38.680
two parts to it, Jay,
let's deal with the first part. Does

1320
01:41:38.720 --> 01:41:45.680
the first part alone give justification for
the claim that the orthodox theological positions are

1321
01:41:45.720 --> 01:41:50.119
the only justification for the preconditions of
intelligibility and all the other transcendental categories?

1322
01:41:50.239 --> 01:41:54.920
Now allrators and shows is that the
other position is absurd. Okay, So

1323
01:41:54.960 --> 01:41:58.439
it only shows that that position is
absurd, So that doesn't justify it.

1324
01:41:58.760 --> 01:42:03.359
So the second part is is positing
the Orthodox position. But that's the very

1325
01:42:03.520 --> 01:42:10.520
thing that we're asking for what is
the justification for the claim that the Orthodox

1326
01:42:10.560 --> 01:42:15.039
position alone justifies the preconditions of intelligibility? Correct? So what is it?

1327
01:42:15.279 --> 01:42:17.880
You're just restating the claim. You're
not giving an argument. No, it's

1328
01:42:18.199 --> 01:42:23.960
you're confusing a first order argument with
a metal level argument. It's a category.

1329
01:42:24.039 --> 01:42:27.239
Err. You keep saying, I'm
confusing and you're making claims, but

1330
01:42:27.279 --> 01:42:30.560
then you're never giving any content to
your claim. I just stated the content.

1331
01:42:30.600 --> 01:42:32.119
You just don't understand it. No, I know, I do understand

1332
01:42:32.159 --> 01:42:38.680
what you're saying. You just said, you just said, you just said.

1333
01:42:38.720 --> 01:42:43.000
It's a meta level argument. And
I see here from your good friend

1334
01:42:43.359 --> 01:42:46.239
Annius, right, father deacon and
Nius, which I've read his paper and

1335
01:42:46.439 --> 01:42:50.439
was very interesting. Actually didn't understand
it too bad. I didn't understand it.

1336
01:42:50.479 --> 01:42:54.159
I mean, it was so terrible. He contradicts himself up and down

1337
01:42:54.199 --> 01:42:59.600
on the same page, and he
explicitly says that the tag argument to ask

1338
01:42:59.720 --> 01:43:08.239
for a justification for positing Orthodox view
is wrongheaded because it's prior to epistemology in

1339
01:43:08.359 --> 01:43:12.000
argument long headed in the first order
of reasoning. Okay, so then there

1340
01:43:12.079 --> 01:43:16.880
is that. That's my point.
There is no justification by the criterion by

1341
01:43:17.039 --> 01:43:21.840
first order reasoning, by the criterion
problem you were as by the criterion problem

1342
01:43:21.840 --> 01:43:28.439
you were asking me about, do
you have a justification for the claim that

1343
01:43:28.479 --> 01:43:35.600
the Eastern Orthodox position alone suffices for
the grounding transcendentals? Do you have a

1344
01:43:35.800 --> 01:43:42.600
justification that meets the criterion of justiification
that the first part is the absurdity of

1345
01:43:42.640 --> 01:43:45.600
your worldview in our case, in
this today, and the second part is

1346
01:43:45.720 --> 01:43:50.680
the coherence and the grounding work that
the Orthodox Christian world view does for things

1347
01:43:50.800 --> 01:43:57.159
like universals, laws of logic,
objective ethics, identity over time, All

1348
01:43:57.159 --> 01:44:00.720
those metaphysical principles make sense in a
world that's where God is the creator?

1349
01:44:01.159 --> 01:44:04.600
Okay, Jay, Which is exactly
what I said. So, Jay,

1350
01:44:04.720 --> 01:44:11.560
And the problem of orthodoxy in orthodoxy
argument, does Alan Siegel from your reading

1351
01:44:11.600 --> 01:44:14.680
of his Two Powers in Heaven?
Does he say that the two powers in

1352
01:44:14.760 --> 01:44:20.239
heaven view is heretical? Yeah?
Okay? Do Siegel and boy or in

1353
01:44:20.359 --> 01:44:28.479
consider the two powers in heaven view
akin to logos theology they relate I don't

1354
01:44:28.479 --> 01:44:33.279
know if they'd be a kin Okay, they relate it. So is logos

1355
01:44:33.479 --> 01:44:39.239
is? Yeah? Is logos theology
heretical? According to Orthodox Christianity, meaning

1356
01:44:39.319 --> 01:44:43.920
the theology of Philo is that heretical? Yeah, A Filo's position would be

1357
01:44:43.920 --> 01:44:47.880
banetarian. Okay. According to Boyor
and John Behar and the Catholic Encycopedia,

1358
01:44:48.279 --> 01:44:55.640
was Justin Martyr a proponent of logos
theology or Orthodox trinitarianism. I think that

1359
01:44:56.039 --> 01:45:00.479
Justin had a form of logos theology
and trinitarianism. Okay? Is Justin Martyr

1360
01:45:00.520 --> 01:45:03.840
a saint in the Orthodox Church?
He is? And I we address this

1361
01:45:04.000 --> 01:45:08.479
in the Inspiring Philosophy stream in all
of your arguments. Is it permissible to

1362
01:45:08.520 --> 01:45:13.279
pray to him? We asked for
his intercession? Okay? So when he

1363
01:45:13.399 --> 01:45:17.479
declares that Jesus is another God and
says that the son is a product of

1364
01:45:17.520 --> 01:45:24.000
the Father's will? Are those heretical
positions? There might be a lack of

1365
01:45:24.000 --> 01:45:28.119
clarity there, but we already addressed
this in the Inspiring Philosophy stream. Is

1366
01:45:28.119 --> 01:45:30.399
it heretical to believe that the son
is a product of the Father's will?

1367
01:45:31.439 --> 01:45:35.359
There's probably some lack of clarity there. If that's an authentic text, yeah,

1368
01:45:35.479 --> 01:45:39.760
Is it heretical to believe that the
son is a product of the Father's

1369
01:45:39.760 --> 01:45:43.039
will? Yeah? If he means
it in that sense, we would say

1370
01:45:43.079 --> 01:45:45.800
it's wrong. Okay, is it
heretical? It could be, Okay,

1371
01:45:45.840 --> 01:45:51.079
so it's permissible to pray to heretical
saints. Correct. Well, we don't

1372
01:45:51.119 --> 01:45:56.000
automatically think that if somebody got something
wrong, they're necessarily a heretic. I

1373
01:45:56.000 --> 01:46:02.119
mean, Augustine made any mistakes many
Harris, Well, a heresy has decided

1374
01:46:02.119 --> 01:46:05.039
to believe in the Philiokue, right, Augustine believed in a philio Okay,

1375
01:46:05.119 --> 01:46:09.840
right? Correct? Is that heresy
when it becomes known as a heresy?

1376
01:46:09.920 --> 01:46:12.760
Yes, okay, so now it
would be heretical to believe in that.

1377
01:46:12.760 --> 01:46:15.760
That's what counsels are for. Correct, Okay, thank you very much.

1378
01:46:15.159 --> 01:46:21.239
So do ethities believe in divine simplicity? Jake? I don't remember. You

1379
01:46:21.239 --> 01:46:25.840
don't know. If you don't know
if we believe in divine simplicity? Well

1380
01:46:26.039 --> 01:46:30.600
you say that not in the sense
of absolutely divine simplicity. Are we occasionalists?

1381
01:46:30.600 --> 01:46:34.560
Some? Is it been to me? An occasionalist? It been to

1382
01:46:34.560 --> 01:46:41.880
me. His position seems to be
that created causes actually happen, but God

1383
01:46:41.920 --> 01:46:45.520
can also reverse them. But he
doesn't seem to affirm as strict occasionalism.

1384
01:46:46.239 --> 01:46:49.000
Okay, So is he an occasionalist
or not? You don't know. I

1385
01:46:49.159 --> 01:46:55.640
just answered that, does he believe
in secondary causality? He says that they're

1386
01:46:55.640 --> 01:47:00.840
not necessary, but God can change
them. Does he believe in secondary causality?

1387
01:47:00.840 --> 01:47:02.840
It's a basic term. I just
answered that, yes or no?

1388
01:47:02.920 --> 01:47:05.800
Does he believe in secondary cause out? I just answered it. Dude,

1389
01:47:05.920 --> 01:47:09.920
you didn't answer it. I did. Does he believe in secondary calls out?

1390
01:47:10.079 --> 01:47:13.000
You want me to read you his
position from the book? I just

1391
01:47:13.039 --> 01:47:15.640
asked you, does he believe in
secondary causality? It's a yes or no

1392
01:47:15.720 --> 01:47:17.000
question. I'll give you a chance
to respond. Jay, we've run out

1393
01:47:17.000 --> 01:47:23.000
of that seven minutes. Okay,
no problem. Yeah. The best of

1394
01:47:23.039 --> 01:47:26.920
my understanding of his position is that
he thinks that there's, uh, there

1395
01:47:26.960 --> 01:47:31.760
is real causality in the world.
It's not it doesn't operate apart from God's

1396
01:47:31.760 --> 01:47:35.439
will, and that if God wills
to, he can do a miracle or

1397
01:47:35.479 --> 01:47:41.359
do something differently. So I'm I
mean, I couldn't figure out what exactly

1398
01:47:41.399 --> 01:47:45.840
his position is because I think it's
a bunch of contradictions. So what's up

1399
01:47:45.880 --> 01:47:48.640
next? Are we doing? Be
seven minutes of you interrogating Jake, and

1400
01:47:48.680 --> 01:47:54.479
then we'll go into the closings before
the Q and A. All right,

1401
01:47:59.760 --> 01:48:04.079
so you seem to have a problem
with the idea of reductios and internal critiques

1402
01:48:04.119 --> 01:48:08.920
and uh, meta logic. I'm
not sure why this would be a problem

1403
01:48:08.960 --> 01:48:13.079
for you, given that you're named
the Muslim metaphysician. You know, do

1404
01:48:13.119 --> 01:48:15.680
you know what metalogic is? I
don't have a problem with the critique.

1405
01:48:16.920 --> 01:48:20.439
You don't have a problem with the
Transton argument. No, I have a

1406
01:48:20.439 --> 01:48:26.760
problem with your use of it.
If you've seen my if you've seen my

1407
01:48:26.840 --> 01:48:30.680
debate on this channel. I don't
watch all your debates. I can't listen

1408
01:48:30.720 --> 01:48:34.000
to I've used a format I put
you on four times to listen to it,

1409
01:48:34.079 --> 01:48:38.600
and it's still unbearable. So what
I'm trying to figure out, you

1410
01:48:38.800 --> 01:48:42.600
know what metallogic is? No,
tell me what's metallogical? You have no

1411
01:48:42.640 --> 01:48:45.600
idea what it is? Well,
answer that condescending answer is like, you

1412
01:48:45.640 --> 01:48:49.520
do know? I have no idea
what metalogic is. Yeah, tell me,

1413
01:48:49.800 --> 01:48:54.399
I have no idea. So it's
the questioning of how logic itself works?

1414
01:48:54.680 --> 01:48:59.520
Right, Okay, good? So
is it invalid to speak of metalogical

1415
01:48:59.600 --> 01:49:04.239
argumentation. No, okay, But
your critique, for example, of the

1416
01:49:04.279 --> 01:49:09.119
way that Father Deacon A Andaius argued
in that paper was that he was contradicting

1417
01:49:09.159 --> 01:49:15.520
himself because he argued that there's no
justification for transcenal arguments in an orthodox sense

1418
01:49:15.600 --> 01:49:19.520
of not the first order or first
order argumentation, first order logic. He's

1419
01:49:19.520 --> 01:49:26.079
talking about meta level ugmentation. Was
that a question? So what I'm asking

1420
01:49:26.119 --> 01:49:28.159
you is that why do you have
a problem with it? If it's too

1421
01:49:28.199 --> 01:49:30.439
if you if you understood that it's
a meta level argument, okay. My

1422
01:49:30.560 --> 01:49:35.880
problem with father Deacon Annius, when
problem with what he said in the paper

1423
01:49:36.359 --> 01:49:40.760
is that he makes the claim,
and he seems to make the claim that

1424
01:49:40.800 --> 01:49:45.840
it's a metallogical problem or a metalogical
arguments are right, and therefore it would

1425
01:49:45.840 --> 01:49:53.680
make no sense to ask for justification
or argumentation because it's prior to argumentation.

1426
01:49:54.079 --> 01:49:57.359
That's what I'm not still a form
of there's still you can still justify it.

1427
01:49:57.239 --> 01:50:00.600
It just becomes a paradigm level justification. Yeah, stand that, but

1428
01:50:00.720 --> 01:50:04.359
that's not what my criticism is.
My criticism is that then later in the

1429
01:50:04.399 --> 01:50:10.439
paper he seemingly does try to justify
it when he says, and he talks

1430
01:50:10.479 --> 01:50:13.119
about which I gave the quote I
don't want to waste your time, where

1431
01:50:13.119 --> 01:50:15.359
he says, for only in the
Orthodox doctrine of God, we will see

1432
01:50:15.359 --> 01:50:19.880
that God is the necessary condition,
is rational, omniscient, transcendent, and

1433
01:50:19.960 --> 01:50:23.640
so on and so forth. That
was what I was giving. He starts

1434
01:50:23.680 --> 01:50:28.239
giving all of those reasons, which
is the exact same thing that I would

1435
01:50:28.279 --> 01:50:30.600
do. So what's the problem.
Well, you have a different metaphysic,

1436
01:50:30.680 --> 01:50:34.760
as I pointed out in my opening
statement and in the critiques about your ideas

1437
01:50:34.760 --> 01:50:39.000
of self evident truths, So you
have a different metaphysics. I agree with

1438
01:50:39.039 --> 01:50:41.920
that, But then it comes down
to don't you agree that? Then it

1439
01:50:41.920 --> 01:50:45.960
comes down to the difference in our
metaphysics, which are the debates. That's

1440
01:50:45.960 --> 01:50:49.560
what we're supposed to be. Your
starting point was self evident truths or reason,

1441
01:50:49.960 --> 01:50:55.520
and I know that you claim that
you also start with the direct perception

1442
01:50:55.640 --> 01:50:59.199
or intuitive whatever sense that you have
of all long line about that. Huh

1443
01:50:59.439 --> 01:51:02.479
you think I'm no, But I'm
saying that it bypasses and it ignores the

1444
01:51:02.560 --> 01:51:08.039
question of the first principles of natural
theology or reasoning, which you're committed to

1445
01:51:08.600 --> 01:51:11.680
Yeah, but I thought that you, as an orthodox, believe that the

1446
01:51:11.760 --> 01:51:15.720
news in the same manner is a
legitimate thing to appeal to. That's a

1447
01:51:15.800 --> 01:51:18.680
two que it's a too quickly No, No, it's not. It's saying

1448
01:51:18.760 --> 01:51:21.840
that, No, it's not.
It's saying that because of the same fact

1449
01:51:23.199 --> 01:51:28.640
that we are debating metaphysics. Yeah, but I have a similar position with

1450
01:51:28.720 --> 01:51:31.640
the difference though. But the difference
is that in letter two thirty four at

1451
01:51:31.680 --> 01:51:34.720
Basil, which was my closing statement
which I had to rush through. If

1452
01:51:34.720 --> 01:51:39.000
people want to go back, they
can screenshot it, I noted the argument

1453
01:51:39.079 --> 01:51:42.079
that the energies come down to us, and that's why we have a basis

1454
01:51:42.119 --> 01:51:46.159
for affirmation, or what we call
cataphatic affirmation. I believe in the same

1455
01:51:46.199 --> 01:51:49.920
thing. Yeah, but that's why
my whole argument this time was that when

1456
01:51:49.960 --> 01:51:54.439
you try to do the naming,
when even to me, for example,

1457
01:51:54.479 --> 01:51:58.319
explains in what sense there is similarity
or likeness or resemblance, he says that

1458
01:51:58.399 --> 01:52:01.359
it is not like the created motive
of beings, so it actually tells us

1459
01:52:01.359 --> 01:52:04.600
nothing. So you're naming tells us
nothing because you don't have an energy doctrine

1460
01:52:04.640 --> 01:52:08.000
that comes down to us. That
was the argument, I do we do

1461
01:52:08.079 --> 01:52:10.560
have the same doctrine in terms of
you don't, Yes, we do in

1462
01:52:10.640 --> 01:52:14.279
terms of the energies coming down.
When an energy comes down, does it

1463
01:52:14.319 --> 01:52:16.439
attach to a human being. There's
nothing to do with attaching. It has

1464
01:52:16.439 --> 01:52:20.000
to do with how we predicate.
That's the argument here. So what does

1465
01:52:20.000 --> 01:52:23.680
it mean? That's why I asked
you about the foot, and I asked

1466
01:52:23.680 --> 01:52:28.199
you if a godfoot is nothing like
a human foot, what does it tell

1467
01:52:28.279 --> 01:52:30.159
us? What's the meaning that that's
given us there? In the same way

1468
01:52:30.239 --> 01:52:34.960
that when I say that this paper
has whiteness that is nothing like the whiteness

1469
01:52:34.960 --> 01:52:39.359
in your forehead. So you're still
using the papers are created thing, you

1470
01:52:39.520 --> 01:52:42.800
understand it. And these are creatures. These are creatures. Yeah, they're

1471
01:52:42.800 --> 01:52:46.039
creatures, and we believe that.
So another creature, which is totally unlike

1472
01:52:46.119 --> 01:52:49.199
Allah, tells us nothing about all. So these names and these predicates aren't

1473
01:52:49.199 --> 01:52:51.640
telling us anything as Wetter. No, you're saying, no, I'm giving

1474
01:52:51.680 --> 01:52:56.319
you an argument to show you how
they are. Argument refers to another creature.

1475
01:52:56.840 --> 01:53:00.399
Now you're I'm giving you an argument
to show it refers to another reachure

1476
01:53:00.520 --> 01:53:06.640
that not refers to another creature.
That predication is exactly. It's not meaningless.

1477
01:53:06.680 --> 01:53:11.760
Nominalist predication is not meaningless. It's
circular. That's the point. It's

1478
01:53:11.840 --> 01:53:15.560
arbitrary because you're just using another created
object to try to explain what is beyond

1479
01:53:15.560 --> 01:53:18.079
the creative. That's the whole point
of the argu That's what I've been arguing

1480
01:53:18.079 --> 01:53:23.119
this whole time. And that's why
your position contradicts. Because on the one

1481
01:53:23.159 --> 01:53:28.640
hand, the uncreated foot is nothing
like the human created foots. But you

1482
01:53:28.680 --> 01:53:30.239
say, oh, but it actually
kind of is. But we don't know

1483
01:53:30.279 --> 01:53:32.920
the meaning of that. So it's
we do know the meaning of anything.

1484
01:53:32.920 --> 01:53:36.239
We do know the meaning. Again, you're misrepresentative even to me. Assessed

1485
01:53:36.239 --> 01:53:42.520
both both that we don't He says
that it's like it we don't know the

1486
01:53:42.560 --> 01:53:45.039
meaning. He doesn't say that,
Yes, he does, doesn't say we

1487
01:53:45.079 --> 01:53:48.199
don't know the meaning. Yes,
he does give give the evidence that we

1488
01:53:48.239 --> 01:53:54.680
don't know the meaning of what Because
when you know that the godfoot, you

1489
01:53:54.720 --> 01:53:58.279
know what I mean, show that
he says we don't know the meaning.

1490
01:54:00.239 --> 01:54:01.760
Where does he say we don't know
that? Okay? What he says is

1491
01:54:01.800 --> 01:54:06.399
that what it means is that it
exists in a manner befitting a lot that

1492
01:54:06.439 --> 01:54:10.880
tells us nothing. Oh it does. So when your Orthodox Church says the

1493
01:54:10.960 --> 01:54:13.880
exact same thing, what does that
mean. We don't say that. We

1494
01:54:13.920 --> 01:54:17.560
don't say that God doesn't have an
uncreative I mean he doesn't say in a

1495
01:54:17.640 --> 01:54:23.840
God be Your Orthodox Church doesn't talk
about it, God befitting manner, not

1496
01:54:23.880 --> 01:54:28.880
a god be fitting foot. Does
it talk about a God? Talk about

1497
01:54:28.880 --> 01:54:34.840
a God? I'm asking you?
Does it talk about I'm asking you the

1498
01:54:34.920 --> 01:54:41.039
same way that it's described in the
text. That's so no answer the same

1499
01:54:41.119 --> 01:54:46.920
way, in the same way.
In this revelation doesn't tell us anything when

1500
01:54:46.920 --> 01:54:54.439
we read it. Of course,
revelation means things when we read the word,

1501
01:54:55.000 --> 01:55:00.680
you're telling me nothing. God described
God describes what his hand and feet

1502
01:55:00.000 --> 01:55:04.359
actually do. And so you have
no idea. You haven't even read.

1503
01:55:06.119 --> 01:55:10.520
You said, it's creating Adam.
But that's another created thing. I'll give

1504
01:55:10.560 --> 01:55:13.760
you a chance to Adam is not
a created thing. I'll give you a

1505
01:55:13.800 --> 01:55:18.079
chance to answer. His hands,
his hands are not created. Neither is

1506
01:55:18.119 --> 01:55:21.399
his foot is created hand. He
said He's gonna give me a chance.

1507
01:55:24.640 --> 01:55:28.680
Time is up. Cat me respond, and then you we can move on.

1508
01:55:29.119 --> 01:55:34.359
An uncreated hand in like manner,
an uncreated essence has nothing in common.

1509
01:55:34.760 --> 01:55:41.560
You have not shown that simply using
the same word entails that there is

1510
01:55:41.720 --> 01:55:45.399
similarity. And I've explained what an
uncreated hand is. It is that by

1511
01:55:45.439 --> 01:55:50.199
which a loss of panetality can grasp
things that he can create. Adam with

1512
01:55:50.239 --> 01:55:55.960
his own two hands. That's created
exactly, no creatures. Those are creatures,

1513
01:55:56.000 --> 01:55:59.000
hands creatures, and so is God's
knowledge. God's knowledge is created.

1514
01:55:59.279 --> 01:56:01.560
Knowledge is a creature. Yeah,
doesn't you believe? Right? We'll go

1515
01:56:01.600 --> 01:56:09.159
to the closing. Your position seven. I don't even understand basic arguments.

1516
01:56:09.399 --> 01:56:15.840
Seven minute closing? So what I
you got? All right, gentlemen,

1517
01:56:15.880 --> 01:56:20.520
we've gotta we've this one. I
earlier I got the order wrong. So

1518
01:56:20.600 --> 01:56:25.560
it's actually that the closings will be
just as you expected. Namely, jac

1519
01:56:25.560 --> 01:56:29.920
will go first, then Jay will
go for his closing, and then we'll

1520
01:56:29.920 --> 01:56:32.039
go into the Q and A.
So we have seven minutes. The clock

1521
01:56:32.159 --> 01:56:35.359
is set for you, Jake.
The floor is all yours for your seven

1522
01:56:35.399 --> 01:56:48.880
minute closing statement. Okay, okay, ready here we go. All right,

1523
01:56:54.000 --> 01:56:57.680
I'm about well, it's been an
interesting debate. I can say that.

1524
01:56:57.800 --> 01:57:01.520
But Jay, as we've seen,
he doesn't understand basic ethity alpda.

1525
01:57:01.800 --> 01:57:06.399
He couldn't answer whether clearly Ibanitaia is
an occasional list. I've got a book

1526
01:57:06.399 --> 01:57:10.880
over here which I can can I
don't mind actually sending it to Jay for

1527
01:57:10.960 --> 01:57:15.760
free, where he completely refutes occasionalism. We do believe in secondary causation.

1528
01:57:15.880 --> 01:57:18.119
Jay, So I guess you don't
know that he didn't know the basic difference,

1529
01:57:18.199 --> 01:57:23.960
didn't say that you're not allowed to
speak. But I do want to

1530
01:57:24.239 --> 01:57:27.199
just to. I'll give you a
chance to in your closing as well to

1531
01:57:27.760 --> 01:57:30.319
rebut Jake, but I do want
to just for the closing statements, I

1532
01:57:30.359 --> 01:57:31.319
want to keep it. Yeah,
I know it's hard, Jay, you're

1533
01:57:31.359 --> 01:57:35.600
getting refused to chill out. Just
chill out, all right, We're ready,

1534
01:57:35.640 --> 01:57:41.520
James to restart. Let's see.
I'll give you six minutes and twenty

1535
01:57:41.600 --> 01:57:45.079
seconds. Okay, good, here
we go. So Jay can't keep quiet

1536
01:57:45.119 --> 01:57:48.199
because he knows that he's being made
a fool, and he did it to

1537
01:57:48.279 --> 01:57:53.880
himself. He doesn't know the basic
difference between tef Weed and Nana and tef

1538
01:57:53.920 --> 01:57:57.039
weeded Kfia. This is basic.
And he says, oh, well,

1539
01:57:57.079 --> 01:57:59.920
your god is just a god of
the Arabs. No, but if you

1540
01:58:00.239 --> 01:58:04.359
read our literature in the same way
that I know the difference between usia and

1541
01:58:04.600 --> 01:58:09.840
which is essence, and I understand
the term homo ussion. I don't speak

1542
01:58:09.880 --> 01:58:14.760
Greek, I don't speak Latin,
but I understand these terms because I've read

1543
01:58:15.199 --> 01:58:18.439
several dozen books on the subject to
be acquainted with the terms. But you

1544
01:58:18.600 --> 01:58:23.239
haven't. And that's why you look
like an ignorant buffoon, because you don't

1545
01:58:23.279 --> 01:58:27.079
know the basic difference. And that's
why you're mocking right now because it's hard

1546
01:58:27.119 --> 01:58:29.800
on you. Everybody can see how
this debate went for you, Jay,

1547
01:58:29.840 --> 01:58:33.000
it looked really pathetic. Now,
going back to the point, he didn't

1548
01:58:33.119 --> 01:58:39.000
understand that we believe in secondary causation, that Ibantamia wasn't occasionalist. Yeah,

1549
01:58:39.039 --> 01:58:41.439
he didn't give a clear option.
He said, Oh, he's contradictory.

1550
01:58:41.479 --> 01:58:45.159
He doesn't understand. And also he
doesn't, as I said, understand a

1551
01:58:45.439 --> 01:58:49.720
basic difference between Tefweeda Nana and tefweed
Kfi, which is very basic. Okay,

1552
01:58:49.720 --> 01:58:53.840
there are many things. He didn't
even know what the petra was.

1553
01:58:54.199 --> 01:58:59.119
It's is very basic to our epistemology. How are you gonna critique our epistemology,

1554
01:58:59.319 --> 01:59:01.439
and you don't even know what the
fifthra is. It's a complete joke.

1555
01:59:01.840 --> 01:59:05.720
Now in terms of my arguments,
he didn't respond really to any of

1556
01:59:05.760 --> 01:59:10.640
them. On my first argument,
the LPT, the Father is God,

1557
01:59:10.800 --> 01:59:13.800
the Son is God, and the
Holy Spirit's God. And they're not each

1558
01:59:13.840 --> 01:59:15.960
other. They're distinct from each other
the same way that we count. Jay,

1559
01:59:16.039 --> 01:59:20.079
let me help you out. One
plus one plus one does not equal

1560
01:59:20.079 --> 01:59:25.239
one, sir, It equals three. So the muscle mean has been vindicated,

1561
01:59:25.439 --> 01:59:28.840
Thank you very much, Jay.
And his only response is, oh,

1562
01:59:28.920 --> 01:59:32.000
we count different things in different ways. And I asked you for an

1563
01:59:32.000 --> 01:59:40.000
objective criteria of why we count attributes
or energies and persons by identity and we

1564
01:59:40.119 --> 01:59:45.720
count God's by division other than an
ad hoc unprincipled assertion, And you had

1565
01:59:45.800 --> 01:59:50.119
no answer to that whatsoever, Sir. You'd had no answer, Yeah,

1566
01:59:50.199 --> 01:59:55.000
keep shaking your head. And then
you claimed, oh, you claimed,

1567
01:59:55.399 --> 01:59:59.239
Jake, actually counts by division.
And then when I questioned you about how

1568
01:59:59.279 --> 02:00:02.920
I count by divis in the cross
examination section, you flopped so hard.

1569
02:00:03.279 --> 02:00:09.479
I don't count by division. We
count the attributes by identity, by the

1570
02:00:09.560 --> 02:00:15.479
fact, even though they're inseparable and
not divided. They still count as more

1571
02:00:15.520 --> 02:00:19.399
than one. That means we're counting
them by identity, not by division.

1572
02:00:19.720 --> 02:00:25.680
So you haven't shown that I've counted
by division within God whatsoever. The only

1573
02:00:25.720 --> 02:00:30.319
thing you have is an unprincipled way
of avoiding saying that there are three gods

1574
02:00:30.359 --> 02:00:33.920
because you just don't want to admit
that you're a polytheist, which everybody knows

1575
02:00:33.960 --> 02:00:39.880
that you are, including the Roman
Orthodox. The Sorry we're Roman Catholics.

1576
02:00:40.079 --> 02:00:45.159
Now here we go to Jay's point
here where he's refuted by the Roman Catholics.

1577
02:00:45.600 --> 02:00:51.079
Right here we go Branson again refuted
him on the claim that Branson himself

1578
02:00:51.119 --> 02:00:56.720
says, the Gregory of Nissa believes
that the essence of God to divine essences

1579
02:00:56.840 --> 02:01:00.199
universal Jayan is one of his videos. He says, apply that same idea

1580
02:01:00.279 --> 02:01:06.000
to the Trinity, which is that
each of the hypostheses instantiates the divine nature.

1581
02:01:06.479 --> 02:01:11.840
So they are instantiations of the divine
nature. Now, Jay, don't

1582
02:01:11.840 --> 02:01:14.920
get a wrestled out of your seat. Now, I know they're not merely

1583
02:01:15.039 --> 02:01:19.520
instantiations, but they do instantiate the
divine essence. Nevertheless, Timothy Paul Catholic

1584
02:01:19.520 --> 02:01:25.880
philosopher says about the instantiation view,
there are at least two problems with Jay

1585
02:01:25.920 --> 02:01:30.800
Dyer's Eastern Orthodox instantiation view. This
is a critique from the Catholics who believe

1586
02:01:30.800 --> 02:01:35.800
they're polytheists that the instantiation view has
to face an answer to why the person

1587
02:01:35.920 --> 02:01:40.960
nature question, both having to do
with the conciliar claim that there is only

1588
02:01:41.000 --> 02:01:45.279
one God. First, consider a
problem often raised against social trinitarianism, a

1589
02:01:45.359 --> 02:01:50.560
type of instantiation view that builds into
the unity of God much more than mere

1590
02:01:50.600 --> 02:01:57.920
instantiation. The problem goes as follows. The instantiation view gives up monotheism when

1591
02:01:57.960 --> 02:02:00.079
we count human people, Jay,
just like I ask you how many people

1592
02:02:00.079 --> 02:02:02.600
are on the screen, which your
own church father would have said one,

1593
02:02:02.680 --> 02:02:09.720
which is ridiculous. We count by
individual instances of humanity. When my daughters

1594
02:02:10.000 --> 02:02:15.640
Mary, Beatrice Edith Agnes, each
instantiate the universal humanity, and each has

1595
02:02:15.680 --> 02:02:18.960
a proper characteristic such that we don't
confuse them what we have. There are

1596
02:02:19.079 --> 02:02:24.640
four humans, not a single human, like Gregory of Nissis says. So

1597
02:02:24.880 --> 02:02:29.800
likewise on the instantiation count, we
ought to invert the line from the afthinacious

1598
02:02:29.840 --> 02:02:34.199
creed saying instead that there is not
one God but three gods. Think about

1599
02:02:34.239 --> 02:02:41.079
it another way, Christians wanted to
safeguard the monotheism that they inherited from Judaism.

1600
02:02:41.279 --> 02:02:45.159
Whether they succeeded as a separate question. Now suppose a Jewish Man were

1601
02:02:45.199 --> 02:02:48.720
accused of polytheism. Here's the defense
he could give on this instantiation view of

1602
02:02:48.760 --> 02:02:51.880
the divine nature. He could say, yes, it is true. I

1603
02:02:53.000 --> 02:02:58.159
worship the God of Israel, Ball
of the Canaanites, Dagon of the Philistines,

1604
02:02:58.319 --> 02:03:02.640
and countless others. But fear not, I only countenance a single universal

1605
02:03:02.680 --> 02:03:08.600
divinity, which each of my many
gods instantiates. As such, I'm still

1606
02:03:08.680 --> 02:03:13.279
a monotheist. I don't think Moses
would be impressed. Jay. This is

1607
02:03:13.319 --> 02:03:16.840
what Timothy Paul is saying, that
you're clearly just a polytheist. Now,

1608
02:03:17.760 --> 02:03:23.039
what does Jay say about the Catholic
view? He rightly points out that it

1609
02:03:23.079 --> 02:03:27.760
reduces to modalism. And I agree. That's why the Catholic view is modalism.

1610
02:03:27.880 --> 02:03:30.960
The Eastern Orthodox view is polytheism.
They say that the truth is in

1611
02:03:31.000 --> 02:03:36.159
between, but they're never able to
explain that properly. Jay says, I

1612
02:03:36.239 --> 02:03:40.600
equivocated on power, but he doesn't
believe that the Father, Son and Holy

1613
02:03:40.640 --> 02:03:44.359
Spirit have the same abilities. He
couldn't give an even answer if the Father

1614
02:03:44.439 --> 02:03:46.840
has the ability or power to become
incarnate, because he knew that would result

1615
02:03:46.920 --> 02:03:49.600
in them not having the same powers, in which they wouldn't be the same

1616
02:03:49.640 --> 02:03:56.800
God. Thomas Aquinas criticizes that view
in the Summa in part three and less

1617
02:03:56.840 --> 02:04:00.399
but not least, Jay was not
able to actually do with the ethy Alkida,

1618
02:04:00.640 --> 02:04:04.960
and it's because he hasn't even read
our texts before the debate. He

1619
02:04:05.000 --> 02:04:09.000
needed to delay it. So people
were wondering what the delay was. It

1620
02:04:09.079 --> 02:04:12.600
was because of him. He wasn't
able to read an English translation of an

1621
02:04:12.680 --> 02:04:15.880
unreleased book, and that's why he
doesn't understand our position. Thank you very

1622
02:04:15.920 --> 02:04:19.920
much. That will could it over
to Jay for his ten minute closing as

1623
02:04:19.920 --> 02:04:21.880
well. Want to get it.
I want to say, folks, if

1624
02:04:21.920 --> 02:04:26.600
you haven't yet, check out the
poll in the live chat you can vote

1625
02:04:26.600 --> 02:04:30.880
on where you stand on this question. Tonight already has two seven hundred and

1626
02:04:30.880 --> 02:04:34.840
fifty four votes, so log in
right now in the live chat you can

1627
02:04:34.880 --> 02:04:39.720
put your vote in the poll or
that Jay, the floor is all yours.

1628
02:04:40.199 --> 02:04:43.520
I hope Jake's okay, because the
whole debate, he's basically been Spergin

1629
02:04:43.640 --> 02:04:46.359
and the squirming like something's wrong over
there, he's got Parkinson's or what's going

1630
02:04:46.359 --> 02:04:48.279
on. But I hope he's okay. I didn't mean to hurt him so

1631
02:04:48.359 --> 02:04:53.479
bad or hurt his feelings. I
love you, Jake Man. Yeah,

1632
02:04:53.520 --> 02:04:55.920
I think that. First of all, as I pointed out when he asked

1633
02:04:55.920 --> 02:04:58.840
me about Iven, to me,
I was clearly trying to remember exactly what

1634
02:04:58.920 --> 02:05:02.840
his position was from the Suleman book, and I specifically said that he allows

1635
02:05:02.880 --> 02:05:08.600
for created causation. Jake then tried
to make me sound like I was saying

1636
02:05:08.640 --> 02:05:10.880
that he was an occasionalist. I
never said that, so that was a

1637
02:05:10.880 --> 02:05:15.239
complete dishonest lie. I said that
he believes that there's real causation in the

1638
02:05:15.279 --> 02:05:17.840
world, but he also thinks that
God can intervene and do miracles. So

1639
02:05:17.880 --> 02:05:23.000
that was a straight up lie,
just looking for anything grasping at straws.

1640
02:05:23.039 --> 02:05:27.520
Because he performed so badly, it's
probably why he had to or take off

1641
02:05:27.520 --> 02:05:30.880
his camera. I don't know if
he's running the bathroom to take a comfort

1642
02:05:30.920 --> 02:05:33.000
break or what's going on, But
yeah, I think if we review this

1643
02:05:33.039 --> 02:05:39.079
debate, we'll notice that the central
issues that were in question two ways of

1644
02:05:39.119 --> 02:05:44.479
accounting for unity of multiplicity, as
I pointed out in my opening statement,

1645
02:05:44.800 --> 02:05:48.000
not a question of who's the true
monotheis versus the polytheist the way that Jake

1646
02:05:48.119 --> 02:05:53.520
wanted to characterize the debate, because
if you go watch, for example,

1647
02:05:53.600 --> 02:05:57.800
Jake's debate with doctor bo Branson or
his debate with doctor Khalil, you'll notice

1648
02:05:57.800 --> 02:06:02.239
that Jake consistently had no real way
to answer for the actual questions of how

1649
02:06:02.279 --> 02:06:09.279
we account for multiplicity and unity in
his conception of the attributes in the Essence.

1650
02:06:09.560 --> 02:06:14.760
I specifically gave numerous arguments in the
opening statement that Jake never got anywhere

1651
02:06:14.800 --> 02:06:16.920
near touching. He says, I
didn't make any arguments I did. I

1652
02:06:16.960 --> 02:06:23.800
made countless arguments throughout that opening statement. I specifically pointed out that not that

1653
02:06:23.960 --> 02:06:28.439
Jake only counts in one way.
I said that when he uses the terminology

1654
02:06:28.439 --> 02:06:33.560
of inseparability, that he's using the
idea of counting by division, and it's

1655
02:06:33.560 --> 02:06:39.520
simply saying that if you say,
for example, that the attributes are undivided,

1656
02:06:39.640 --> 02:06:44.920
or that the essence is one and
undivided, that's also counting by division.

1657
02:06:45.439 --> 02:06:48.239
That's how the ancient and medieval world
typically thought, unless they were dealing

1658
02:06:48.279 --> 02:06:54.319
with objects of first order imposition or
objects of second order imposition. Again,

1659
02:06:54.359 --> 02:06:59.119
I addressed those disputes when I covered
that topic. So most of the stuff

1660
02:06:59.119 --> 02:07:03.840
that Jacobs pointed to I did address. He just then came on and said

1661
02:07:04.039 --> 02:07:08.680
he never addressed nothing. I said, No, I did address everything that

1662
02:07:08.720 --> 02:07:11.560
you said. Just most of what
I addressed you just weren't familiar with or

1663
02:07:11.600 --> 02:07:14.880
you didn't know what these topics were. Now again in the topic of the

1664
02:07:15.039 --> 02:07:21.199
universal for us, as universals get
discussed amongst the Cappadocians and then post Chalcidon,

1665
02:07:21.640 --> 02:07:25.279
it becomes more and more specified and
more and more clarified. So if

1666
02:07:25.319 --> 02:07:28.880
you just asked me something like,
as God's essence a universal, it really

1667
02:07:28.880 --> 02:07:34.479
depends on what timeframe we're talking about. But Cappadocians, post Calcidon and so

1668
02:07:34.560 --> 02:07:40.000
forth, we don't usually see the
idea of a universal itself in the platonic

1669
02:07:40.079 --> 02:07:44.319
sense being attributed to the divine essence. It's simply said to be something common.

1670
02:07:44.399 --> 02:07:46.039
So we can say that, yeah, the divine essence is common,

1671
02:07:46.319 --> 02:07:51.119
But universals take on a specific category
of a created thing, especially in same

1672
02:07:51.159 --> 02:07:56.399
Maximus. Maximus, for example,
argues that universals can perish, and this

1673
02:07:56.479 --> 02:08:03.920
is in the Tolusen dissertation. Universals
aren't the divine essence because the divine essence

1674
02:08:03.920 --> 02:08:07.359
can't perish, and if universals comparison, then universals are created things. Now

1675
02:08:07.640 --> 02:08:11.920
universals are patterned on things in the
divine mind, we would call those the

1676
02:08:11.920 --> 02:08:15.840
divine ideas. But that's a different
topic. Let's advise to say it's again

1677
02:08:15.880 --> 02:08:20.600
another kind of equivocation with how the
Cappadocians use the term common or universal versus

1678
02:08:20.920 --> 02:08:24.520
the way that it's used by the
time of Saint John Damascus in a more

1679
02:08:24.520 --> 02:08:28.279
precise way about created realities. So
the universal's dispute, however, is very

1680
02:08:28.279 --> 02:08:33.720
important for this debate because, as
we saw, Jake's denial of universals results

1681
02:08:33.720 --> 02:08:37.880
in a lot of problems for accounting
for things like meaning and identity over time.

1682
02:08:39.279 --> 02:08:41.800
That's why I kept stressing, how
would Jake understand various texts of the

1683
02:08:41.840 --> 02:08:46.720
Qur'an. And you'll notice when we
got into the nitty gritty of the epistemology,

1684
02:08:46.079 --> 02:08:50.600
Jake completely collapsed Jake went in circles. He was lost, he didn't

1685
02:08:50.600 --> 02:08:54.079
know what was going on where he
was. Even at he thought that you

1686
02:08:54.119 --> 02:08:56.680
could say that, well, some
things are self evident, which you noticed

1687
02:08:56.720 --> 02:09:00.520
when I first asked him, he
didn't want to say it was self evident.

1688
02:09:01.239 --> 02:09:03.039
About a minute or two later,
yeah, these are self evident truths.

1689
02:09:03.720 --> 02:09:07.399
But then he's when I asked him
about the criterion problem, which is

1690
02:09:07.560 --> 02:09:09.960
how do we know the self evident
versus the non self evident, he began

1691
02:09:11.039 --> 02:09:15.279
appealed to a self referential thing because
we know because of the way that we

1692
02:09:15.359 --> 02:09:18.319
go about doing it. Yeah,
but that doesn't justify the claim, and

1693
02:09:18.359 --> 02:09:20.560
he knows that it doesn't, and
that's why he went deeper into deflecting over

1694
02:09:20.640 --> 02:09:26.199
into transcendental argumentation and justification. And
he didn't know what a metalogical argument was,

1695
02:09:26.319 --> 02:09:31.800
even though he admits that the FDA
was making a metalogical argumentation in the

1696
02:09:31.840 --> 02:09:37.359
paper. The paper's just arguing that
the transcendental argument isn't justified in the exact

1697
02:09:37.359 --> 02:09:41.359
same way that first order types of
beliefs are justified. So, and this

1698
02:09:41.479 --> 02:09:45.640
is just to say that different things
are argued for in different ways. If

1699
02:09:45.680 --> 02:09:48.960
you watch my Matt Dill Hunty debate. This becomes a very central point of

1700
02:09:50.039 --> 02:09:52.840
dispute between us, where Matt thinks
that everything is argued for in one way.

1701
02:09:54.880 --> 02:10:00.439
Likewise that very low tier quality of
debate that Jake shares with at dyla

1702
02:10:00.479 --> 02:10:03.640
Monkey. They both just seem to
think that words mean one thing. All

1703
02:10:03.760 --> 02:10:09.039
arguments are argued in the same way. Justification happens in one way. Different

1704
02:10:09.039 --> 02:10:13.079
types of things are proven and argued
for in different ways. Different types of

1705
02:10:13.079 --> 02:10:18.239
things are counted in different ways.
So I made this very clear. Again,

1706
02:10:18.319 --> 02:10:20.560
Jake didn't get any of that,
and everything had to be smushed down

1707
02:10:20.560 --> 02:10:26.319
and reduced into one simple, one
dimensional ways of understanding everything throughout this debate.

1708
02:10:26.920 --> 02:10:28.640
So I think that if people paid
attention, especially when we got to

1709
02:10:28.680 --> 02:10:35.640
the notion of handfoot, the bodily
properties that are ascribed to a lot in

1710
02:10:35.720 --> 02:10:39.520
his school. In his tradition,
Jake couldn't tell us what an uncreated foot

1711
02:10:39.720 --> 02:10:45.119
is that doesn't bear similarity to foot, except that it's similar in the case

1712
02:10:45.199 --> 02:10:50.359
of functionality of creating. Okay,
but the creating that you talked about,

1713
02:10:50.479 --> 02:10:52.960
or the piece of paper that you
referred to, or this or that those

1714
02:10:52.000 --> 02:10:56.079
are other created things. And so
the creative things that you keep appealing to

1715
02:10:56.680 --> 02:11:03.239
never match up or touch upon the
uncreated thing, which the Quran says is

1716
02:11:03.680 --> 02:11:09.560
unlike right Allah is absolutely unlike creatures. What's that fifty seconds. So the

1717
02:11:09.680 --> 02:11:15.039
argument is not that Jake believes,
or even to mea believes that there's no

1718
02:11:15.119 --> 02:11:20.680
way to have positive predication. The
argument is that they contradict, and Suleyman

1719
02:11:20.760 --> 02:11:26.880
points out numerous places where actually he
contradicts. So Jake says, oh,

1720
02:11:26.920 --> 02:11:30.439
he didn't read it. I was
just waiting for a good book on this

1721
02:11:30.560 --> 02:11:33.560
topic to have a good debate.
So Jake's trying to make it like I

1722
02:11:33.640 --> 02:11:35.920
was, you know, avoiding something
or whatever. No, no, no,

1723
02:11:35.960 --> 02:11:39.319
I just wanted to have a good
debate, and I went to the

1724
02:11:39.319 --> 02:11:43.319
trouble of reading this four hundred page
book for you to have a good discussion

1725
02:11:43.359 --> 02:11:48.720
and a good debate. And again
Suleyman, pages three thirty one, notes

1726
02:11:48.199 --> 02:11:56.239
that he absolutely contradicts himself on this
point. He also contradicts on this notion

1727
02:11:56.319 --> 02:11:58.920
of what the divine perfections are,
right, and so when we're told that,

1728
02:12:00.039 --> 02:12:03.239
yeah, we are supposed to know
what a hand is. Every Jew

1729
02:12:03.279 --> 02:12:07.560
are Christian in the seventh or eighth
century would know what a hand is my

1730
02:12:07.720 --> 02:12:13.119
empirically based end time. With that, we're gonna go into the Q and

1731
02:12:13.159 --> 02:12:16.199
A. I want to say,
folks, we're going to try to move

1732
02:12:16.359 --> 02:12:20.560
through this as fast as humanly possible. A couple of quick things. One

1733
02:12:20.680 --> 02:12:24.680
is the goal is what we have
written down here is thirty minutes. As

1734
02:12:24.760 --> 02:12:30.600
well as we will not read super
chats that are just attacks on people,

1735
02:12:30.720 --> 02:12:35.680
we do want actual sincere questions.
Also, as we had mentioned earlier in

1736
02:12:35.680 --> 02:12:37.479
the debate, and as you can
probably see at the bottom right of your

1737
02:12:37.479 --> 02:12:39.840
screen, we're only going to read
super chats that are five dollars or more.

1738
02:12:41.000 --> 02:12:43.680
We're gonna try to get to standard
questions, namely when you just tag

1739
02:12:43.720 --> 02:12:46.840
me in the chat with a question. But I just can't make any promises

1740
02:12:46.880 --> 02:12:50.199
because we do we agree to a
thirty minute Q and I. So I

1741
02:12:50.239 --> 02:12:52.039
want to go through this as fast
as humanly possible. Thanks for your patience,

1742
02:12:52.039 --> 02:12:56.000
and here we go. First up, Thanks very much, Jean Michael

1743
02:12:56.039 --> 02:13:01.039
b says. Jake says that we
are polytheists. You know, he follows

1744
02:13:01.520 --> 02:13:07.560
a pagan god named La. Give
you a chance to respond to that,

1745
02:13:07.640 --> 02:13:11.239
Jake. I have a feeling you
disagree. Yeah, I don't know where

1746
02:13:11.279 --> 02:13:18.560
he's getting this pagan god concept of
law. In fact, even Orthodox Christians,

1747
02:13:18.600 --> 02:13:22.640
I think Jay, maybe this is
something that we could agree on.

1748
02:13:22.119 --> 02:13:30.640
Orthodox Christians that are actually Arabs call
God Allah. So if you think that

1749
02:13:30.640 --> 02:13:35.760
that's the case, then Jay is
just as much of a pagan and Orthodox

1750
02:13:35.800 --> 02:13:41.800
are for using the term Allah.
So it's completely ridiculous question for Jake.

1751
02:13:41.039 --> 02:13:45.880
They say, how does Allah,
who is above the seven heavens, descend

1752
02:13:46.000 --> 02:13:52.119
to the lowest heaven? Does he
have temporal space? I don't know what

1753
02:13:52.279 --> 02:13:58.439
temporal space means because that time and
space are two different things, at least

1754
02:13:58.439 --> 02:14:03.479
in my under standing, unless you
take a modern physical understanding where time and

1755
02:14:03.479 --> 02:14:07.439
space are the same thing. So
I don't even really understand the question.

1756
02:14:07.800 --> 02:14:13.199
But when you ask how, that
shows that the questioner doesn't understand because we

1757
02:14:13.319 --> 02:14:16.600
don't say that we know the how
or the kfea. We don't know the

1758
02:14:16.720 --> 02:14:22.000
kfea of the attribute. So,
and it's not only for descent or nozoul,

1759
02:14:22.079 --> 02:14:26.880
it's the same for Yed or Hua
or any of the attributes. We

1760
02:14:26.000 --> 02:14:31.720
don't talk about the howness of the
attribute. That's disclaimer, folks. We

1761
02:14:31.800 --> 02:14:33.920
have so many questions. Please don't
submit any more questions. We're going to

1762
02:14:33.960 --> 02:14:37.439
try to move fast. Joshua to
King says, believe whatever you want.

1763
02:14:37.560 --> 02:14:41.880
Allah has eternal attributes that require a
recipient. Therefore he's dependent upon other than

1764
02:14:41.960 --> 02:14:48.640
himself to express himself. Who's that
for. Yeah, that's just a statement.

1765
02:14:48.720 --> 02:14:52.960
But I mean, okay, we
don't believe that. We don't believe

1766
02:14:52.960 --> 02:14:56.800
that a loss of pantata. How
is he if he's dependent upon his attributes,

1767
02:14:58.199 --> 02:15:00.760
Let's say, for the sake of
argument, he's dependent upon his attributes.

1768
02:15:01.039 --> 02:15:05.000
How is he dependent upon somebody else? They're his attributes. So,

1769
02:15:05.399 --> 02:15:07.960
I mean, that just makes no
sense. It's the same. It would

1770
02:15:07.960 --> 02:15:11.840
be a similar concept in Orthodoxy to
say, oh, God has attributes,

1771
02:15:11.039 --> 02:15:16.079
so he's dependent upon somebody else.
Well, the attributes are his. It's

1772
02:15:16.119 --> 02:15:20.319
just such a low level critique.
This one from gould see Taburn says Allah

1773
02:15:20.399 --> 02:15:26.279
and Yahweh are both the that's they're
just crawlling. This one coming in from

1774
02:15:26.359 --> 02:15:33.159
do appreciate your question? This one
is from screens reloading. I mean,

1775
02:15:35.119 --> 02:15:39.119
Yashay King says, why does the
Koran say it's clear, detailed and explains

1776
02:15:39.159 --> 02:15:46.600
everything, Yet Muslims differ on Allah
in the Koran doesn't detail the hyphia slash

1777
02:15:46.640 --> 02:15:48.439
howness. Let me know if I
it wrong. Yeah, no, no,

1778
02:15:48.479 --> 02:15:52.199
it's okay. So he's saying,
why does the Kuran say it's a

1779
02:15:52.239 --> 02:15:56.399
detailed explanation of all things? That's
in chapter twelve, verse one eleven when

1780
02:15:56.439 --> 02:16:01.359
it says tefsi la couliche. But
if you see this phrase used, it's

1781
02:16:01.439 --> 02:16:07.119
obviously used in a hyperbolic manner because
it's used in the same sense when it

1782
02:16:07.199 --> 02:16:11.199
talks about what was revealed to Moses. Uh he was also revealed a detailed

1783
02:16:11.199 --> 02:16:16.760
explanation of all things. And yet
we believe that put An came afterwards and

1784
02:16:16.880 --> 02:16:20.159
revealed things that were not given to
Moses. So it's just a misunderstanding of

1785
02:16:20.199 --> 02:16:24.600
the phrase. This one coming in
from doctor Chillin, says, hey,

1786
02:16:24.680 --> 02:16:30.560
j two part question, is LGBT
allowed in Islam? Because in Suna Son

1787
02:16:30.560 --> 02:16:35.479
and Nabi Dawood five two two four, Mohammad was kissing. Oh, let's

1788
02:16:35.520 --> 02:16:39.959
see, they say, allegedly Muhammad
was kissing another man on the chest.

1789
02:16:39.040 --> 02:16:43.959
They say, should we stone him? I would have to look at the

1790
02:16:45.000 --> 02:16:48.399
headith. I don't know what he's
referring to. But LGBTQ, I don't.

1791
02:16:48.399 --> 02:16:50.319
I mean, I don't want to
get the stream banned or anything,

1792
02:16:50.360 --> 02:16:54.840
but no, we believe it's a
We believe it's a sin uh similar to

1793
02:16:56.159 --> 02:17:01.120
Orthodox So we're actually in agreement on
that perspective that LGB is a sin.

1794
02:17:01.920 --> 02:17:07.200
This one from Famo says, Jay, your entire open was a failed attempt

1795
02:17:07.239 --> 02:17:11.600
at trying to challenge Taheed. Get
once, not once did you attempt to

1796
02:17:11.639 --> 02:17:18.120
prove the blatant paradox known as the
Trinity. Well again, in my last

1797
02:17:18.120 --> 02:17:24.840
statement, I addressed the chief argument
that Jake relies on the LPT, and

1798
02:17:24.920 --> 02:17:31.040
I just simply pointed out that there's
two different ways that counting happens for different

1799
02:17:31.040 --> 02:17:35.440
things. Different things are counted in
different ways, and that's why, you

1800
02:17:35.479 --> 02:17:39.280
know, if you want a fuller
presentation of explaining and arguing the Trinitarian doctrine

1801
02:17:39.280 --> 02:17:43.200
itself, you know, I gave
a lot of those passages in the beginning

1802
02:17:43.200 --> 02:17:46.040
part of the Daniel debate, but
I was just trying to squeeze as much

1803
02:17:46.040 --> 02:17:50.799
in as possible. But I would
also add that I would say that if

1804
02:17:50.879 --> 02:17:52.280
Jake, you know, as he
pointed out, wants to just count by

1805
02:17:52.319 --> 02:17:56.760
identity, if he thinks God is
necessary, and he counts by identity,

1806
02:17:56.799 --> 02:18:01.959
and if we follow the rules of
Tamia that each of the what's true of

1807
02:18:01.000 --> 02:18:05.440
one of the attributes is also true
of the essence and so forth, then

1808
02:18:05.559 --> 02:18:11.479
he's got multiple necessary beings. If
he's got multiple attributes, you got it.

1809
02:18:11.520 --> 02:18:15.559
There's one coming in from Do appreciate
it. Even Lord says j are

1810
02:18:15.600 --> 02:18:20.600
Mormons basically Muslims and Jake as a
Muslim. Well we'll first, we'll give

1811
02:18:20.639 --> 02:18:24.440
you a chance to respond, Jay
are Mormons basically Muslims. Then there's some

1812
02:18:24.520 --> 02:18:33.079
interesting parallels between the supposed prophet status
of Muhammad and the supposed prophet status of

1813
02:18:33.280 --> 02:18:37.639
you know, Joseph Smith in terms
of you know, polygamy or direct new

1814
02:18:37.719 --> 02:18:43.799
revelations that sort of contradict previous revelation. See my argument with Danielikikachu. But

1815
02:18:43.920 --> 02:18:48.559
I also I would argue that you
know, Islam is mainly focused on trying

1816
02:18:48.559 --> 02:18:54.799
to explain through thousands of pages of
debates, what Allah's unity and singleness actually

1817
02:18:54.879 --> 02:19:00.319
is, whereas Mormons are actually tritheis
and believe in three distinct, discrete gods.

1818
02:19:01.760 --> 02:19:03.479
I believe in a lot more than
three gods. But yeah, they

1819
02:19:03.520 --> 02:19:07.639
say, for Jake as a Muslim, what are your thoughts of Mormons compared

1820
02:19:07.680 --> 02:19:15.040
to other Christians and Protestant groups.
Yeah, Mormons. I agree with Jay's

1821
02:19:15.079 --> 02:19:20.399
part about Mormonism. I don't think
it's anything similar to Islam. But Mormons

1822
02:19:20.399 --> 02:19:24.239
are actually some of the biggest polytheists
in the world because they believe Father,

1823
02:19:24.360 --> 02:19:26.200
Son, and Holy Spirit. At
least, I say they're a bit more

1824
02:19:26.239 --> 02:19:30.639
honest than Jay because they admit their
three gods, but then they go much

1825
02:19:30.680 --> 02:19:35.520
further than that by saying that man
can become God one day and not in

1826
02:19:35.559 --> 02:19:39.399
the sense that Jay talks about with
theosis. They go much further than that

1827
02:19:39.479 --> 02:19:43.000
because they believe Father, Son and
Holy Spirit used to not be gods and

1828
02:19:43.040 --> 02:19:46.799
they elevated to that station of God. So they're actually one of the biggest

1829
02:19:46.840 --> 02:19:50.520
polytheists in the world as a religion. You got it. This one from

1830
02:19:50.920 --> 02:19:58.319
Bo Branson says, Jake quotes me
saying trinitarianism quote unquote, seems like saying

1831
02:19:58.520 --> 02:20:05.200
one plus one plus one equals one, not that it is. He admits

1832
02:20:05.360 --> 02:20:11.360
that. I next put Gregory of
Nyssa's response in standard predicate logic, giving

1833
02:20:11.440 --> 02:20:16.680
a formal consistency proof Yeah. So
to be clear, I wouldn't be so

1834
02:20:16.920 --> 02:20:24.079
stupid to claim that Bo Branson actually
explicitly says that the trinity is like one

1835
02:20:24.120 --> 02:20:28.000
plus one plus one equals one.
That's not the point. The point is

1836
02:20:28.040 --> 02:20:33.840
that the original problem. I was
using the quote to explain how he understands

1837
02:20:33.879 --> 02:20:39.799
what the LPT is and we can
agree, I think Jay and I if

1838
02:20:39.840 --> 02:20:43.920
we agree about anything, the difference
in terms of why I say the trinity

1839
02:20:43.959 --> 02:20:48.600
results in three gods is about counting. So that's the only point of the

1840
02:20:48.680 --> 02:20:54.600
quote. It's not to say that
Branson believes that the LPT is successful or

1841
02:20:54.639 --> 02:20:58.040
he believes in three gods. That
would be ridiculous. It's just to show

1842
02:20:58.319 --> 02:21:01.159
that he's explaining what the problem is
supposed to be. And then, of

1843
02:21:01.159 --> 02:21:05.520
course in his dissertation he attempts to, you know, respond to the problem.

1844
02:21:07.200 --> 02:21:09.200
This one coming in from even Lord
says, JA, we got that

1845
02:21:09.239 --> 02:21:16.200
one xxwlzxss question for Jake, do
you believe the eyes are that's weird?

1846
02:21:16.399 --> 02:21:20.040
This Bo Branson says, if there
should turn out to be any problem with

1847
02:21:20.159 --> 02:21:24.280
the doctrine of the trinity at all, it will not be one of mere

1848
02:21:24.479 --> 02:21:33.920
logical inconsistency In saying that quote these
three are one. I mean, that's

1849
02:21:33.920 --> 02:21:37.280
just a claim. But I've given
an argument for the LPT, and the

1850
02:21:37.360 --> 02:21:41.719
same argument that I gave to Branson
is the same one I gave to Jay

1851
02:21:41.799 --> 02:21:46.159
and Branson even in his new book, because I've spoke to other contributors to

1852
02:21:46.200 --> 02:21:50.760
the new book, which has been
not been published yet, he never responds

1853
02:21:50.799 --> 02:21:56.879
to my critique of the unprincipled ad
hoc manner in which they count persons and

1854
02:21:56.000 --> 02:22:01.159
attributes their energies by identity. But
the count got it's by division. He

1855
02:22:01.200 --> 02:22:05.959
has no explanation for them. Of
course, that was explained multiple times tonight.

1856
02:22:05.079 --> 02:22:11.239
It's explained by doctor Branson in many
places, and I addressed it by

1857
02:22:11.280 --> 02:22:16.000
first and second order in position argumentation, as well as showing that multiple theologians,

1858
02:22:16.079 --> 02:22:20.479
even algaz Ali, count by a
division. I don't mind Jay responding,

1859
02:22:20.520 --> 02:22:22.520
but if he's going to respond,
then I'd like to respond to other

1860
02:22:22.559 --> 02:22:26.760
questions. I mean, ja,
no, no, I'm not saying.

1861
02:22:26.840 --> 02:22:31.079
I'm not saying to respond now to
what he said. I'm just saying Jay

1862
02:22:31.159 --> 02:22:35.440
has answered other questions that I would
have wanted to respond to. But I

1863
02:22:35.479 --> 02:22:37.479
was quiet, so well, let
me ask a question about that in terms

1864
02:22:37.479 --> 02:22:41.680
of the moderator, like, so
does the other person get to respond to

1865
02:22:41.920 --> 02:22:45.120
like if a question goes to Jake, does it just to Jake? Or

1866
02:22:45.120 --> 02:22:46.680
how's this going to work? I
don't know. That's what I'm trying to

1867
02:22:46.680 --> 02:22:50.239
call. I'm asking the moderator what
what normally? We normally? This is

1868
02:22:50.280 --> 02:22:54.559
something that I I'm happy to have
your guys creative and put on tonight.

1869
02:22:54.680 --> 02:22:56.479
I would. I think it's best
just because we want to get through as

1870
02:22:56.479 --> 02:23:03.319
many questions as possible. This one
from ma Here eighty four says the Messiah

1871
02:23:03.440 --> 02:23:09.360
in parentheses whose name wasn't Jesus didn't
know the hour? When did the Holy

1872
02:23:09.440 --> 02:23:15.719
Spirit relinquish power to not have the
same knowledge as the father? Emphasis on

1873
02:23:15.879 --> 02:23:18.600
father? I think that's for you, Jay? Is that to me?

1874
02:23:18.719 --> 02:23:22.239
Yeah? If you read Basil letter
two thirty five and six, I think

1875
02:23:24.040 --> 02:23:26.319
two thirty four five and six therefore
is the energies. And then five to

1876
02:23:26.399 --> 02:23:33.040
six addresses this topic where it's just
the use of rhetorical exaggerative language, which

1877
02:23:33.120 --> 02:23:35.879
Jesus does quite a bit. For
example, he says there's none good but

1878
02:23:35.079 --> 02:23:37.799
God. But then we have other
places where he says, of course,

1879
02:23:39.559 --> 02:23:43.600
this person is the good man.
You know, the bottle calls Jesus good,

1880
02:23:43.879 --> 02:23:48.000
Holy Spirit good. So it's a
rhetorical device to say that not even

1881
02:23:48.040 --> 02:23:50.639
I know, right, or not
even the sun knows. It doesn't literally

1882
02:23:50.680 --> 02:23:54.040
mean that he doesn't know, because
we're also told that Jesus knows all things.

1883
02:23:54.840 --> 02:23:58.639
This one from Seur says, is
the trinity a necessary truth or contingent

1884
02:23:58.719 --> 02:24:05.120
truth? If the former, what
is the contradiction of rejecting it? If

1885
02:24:05.120 --> 02:24:11.319
a contradiction isn't shown from denial,
it's a contingent truth. Therefore trinity false.

1886
02:24:11.920 --> 02:24:18.079
And assuming that's to me right,
yeah, I think that this is

1887
02:24:18.520 --> 02:24:22.000
if this is like the atheist TikTok
people that ask this question, this is

1888
02:24:22.040 --> 02:24:26.040
again kind of making the mistake of
thinking that the argument, the transcendal argument,

1889
02:24:26.120 --> 02:24:28.959
is a first order argument. It's
a meta level argument. So that's

1890
02:24:30.040 --> 02:24:33.799
not really relevant to how we are
we argue tagged. This one from f

1891
02:24:33.920 --> 02:24:37.120
c LA News says a Lah,
I know I'm going to say this wrong,

1892
02:24:37.200 --> 02:24:41.639
so help me alu akbar. Yeah, I say this right. This

1893
02:24:41.719 --> 02:24:52.159
one from LH says Jake the meta
Central Dawa says Jay Dyer saying, quote

1894
02:24:52.280 --> 02:24:58.719
Jake doesn't understand. Unquote is not
an argument against Jake. Make an actual

1895
02:24:58.799 --> 02:25:03.319
argue. Give you a chance to
Jade respond to that. Well, I

1896
02:25:03.319 --> 02:25:05.719
mean I might have used that phrase
at a couple points in the debate,

1897
02:25:05.840 --> 02:25:09.600
but I didn't rely only on saying
Jake doesn't understand. I think I used

1898
02:25:09.600 --> 02:25:15.200
that phrase two or three times,
but I gave many arguments. You got

1899
02:25:15.200 --> 02:25:18.840
it. Let's see this one from
LH says, so there's one Allah with

1900
02:25:18.920 --> 02:25:24.559
multiple body parts, i e.
The hands are distinct from the shin complete

1901
02:25:24.639 --> 02:25:28.760
partiality of Allah they put in all
caps. No, we don't believe that

1902
02:25:30.000 --> 02:25:33.159
a laws Yed is a body part. We don't believe that he has any

1903
02:25:33.200 --> 02:25:37.079
body parts. And Jay should know
this. I'm not saying he's claiming that,

1904
02:25:37.200 --> 02:25:41.559
but from reading the text, we
don't believe that their body parts.

1905
02:25:41.719 --> 02:25:48.159
So by people keep asserting this same
falsehood, which Farid Suliman refutes directly in

1906
02:25:48.200 --> 02:25:52.120
the book, just shows their own
ignorance. But they can do it as

1907
02:25:52.159 --> 02:25:56.239
long as they like this. So
coming in from dal Eel says Jake,

1908
02:25:56.719 --> 02:26:00.680
why do you worship ninety nine gods? I'll give you a chance respond to

1909
02:26:00.680 --> 02:26:03.479
that. I don't worship ninety nine
gods, because I don't say that the

1910
02:26:03.600 --> 02:26:09.159
sufat or the Siphah, which is
an attribute, is a god, just

1911
02:26:09.239 --> 02:26:15.520
as Jayder does not say that the
energy of God's will or power or knowledge

1912
02:26:15.719 --> 02:26:20.319
are gods. We don't call them
gods. They're attributes of God. Famo

1913
02:26:20.319 --> 02:26:24.280
says jay If the Son wanted a
tree to be yellow, the Holy Spirit

1914
02:26:24.440 --> 02:26:28.840
wanted it to be orange, and
at the same time the Father wanted it

1915
02:26:28.920 --> 02:26:33.159
to be blue, what color would
the tree be? Yeah, we don't

1916
02:26:33.200 --> 02:26:41.000
believe in that will and intentionality and
action are themselves personal properties. So the

1917
02:26:41.000 --> 02:26:46.360
Trinity shares a common will, a
common nature, and common operations, and

1918
02:26:46.440 --> 02:26:54.760
so there wouldn't be conflicting contrary wills
within God. That's the traits or properties

1919
02:26:54.799 --> 02:26:56.959
of nature. And then when we
talk about the mode in which that nature

1920
02:26:58.000 --> 02:27:00.920
exists, it exists in the mode
of three per since it habits, so

1921
02:27:00.920 --> 02:27:05.520
it's both particularized and it's common at
the same time. So I'm coming in

1922
02:27:05.559 --> 02:27:11.079
from L two A says, did
a natural theist really just try to hijack

1923
02:27:11.120 --> 02:27:18.200
the anthropology of the noose without an
energy essence distinction? I think that's to

1924
02:27:18.280 --> 02:27:22.760
me, and I would say that
I mean I understand. I guess the

1925
02:27:22.799 --> 02:27:26.840
apologetic use of trying to utilize the
notion of the news, but I don't

1926
02:27:26.840 --> 02:27:33.600
think that translates into the talhat theology
that he has in any coherent way.

1927
02:27:33.879 --> 02:27:37.440
You got it, Thank you very
much for this question. Ecclesiastes says,

1928
02:27:37.520 --> 02:27:41.719
Jake, why would you debate?
Let's see this one from Punk Giver says,

1929
02:27:41.840 --> 02:27:46.879
for Jake, if the sun cannot
cause another person, can Allah's foot

1930
02:27:46.000 --> 02:27:52.959
cause another Alah's hand? I mean, it's just a ridiculous questions. Responding

1931
02:27:54.000 --> 02:28:00.440
to Ecclesiastes says, great job,
Jay Dyer, they say Ja or they

1932
02:28:00.479 --> 02:28:09.399
say Jake? Would you debate?
David Wood depends on the topic. Listen

1933
02:28:09.479 --> 02:28:16.680
from Domain says, is the son
a s? If yes, how is

1934
02:28:16.719 --> 02:28:20.719
that possible since he's begotten? And
if no, how is he God?

1935
02:28:20.120 --> 02:28:26.079
Because it's greater to be a a
s E and God is maximally great.

1936
02:28:26.280 --> 02:28:30.319
I think he means, I'll say, but I'm sure Jay got that sayity

1937
02:28:30.600 --> 02:28:35.040
is for us a property that picks
up the father, and so as you.

1938
02:28:35.200 --> 02:28:39.079
If you can go watch the debate
between Jake and doctor bo Branson,

1939
02:28:39.200 --> 02:28:43.120
that whole debate settles this question,
because we could say, for example,

1940
02:28:43.200 --> 02:28:46.479
that all fathers are human beings,
but anything that's not a father is not

1941
02:28:46.520 --> 02:28:50.079
a human right. This ends up
in certain fallacies like the nine the antecedent,

1942
02:28:50.120 --> 02:28:54.000
and if you watch that debate,
Jake's guilty of the nine the antecedent.

1943
02:28:54.600 --> 02:28:58.399
You got it. This one from
the Chelskian says, Jake does your

1944
02:28:58.399 --> 02:29:03.600
back hurt? Okay, that's weird. Abrahams Sorry, guys, I don't

1945
02:29:03.639 --> 02:29:07.360
get to vet all these these such
a dozen. I'm sitting quite comfortably.

1946
02:29:07.360 --> 02:29:13.239
But yeah, you say, what
is the point in Allah using the created

1947
02:29:13.360 --> 02:29:18.520
term hand or foot, et cetera. Yet is nothing like a created hand,

1948
02:29:18.639 --> 02:29:24.079
foot, et cetera. It's It's
something very basic that I've explained numerous

1949
02:29:24.120 --> 02:29:28.000
times, and it seemed that Jay
himself didn't get it when you say that

1950
02:29:28.159 --> 02:29:33.600
these are created things, all of
the predicates that we use in the English

1951
02:29:33.719 --> 02:29:37.000
language or in Arabic, when we
say essence or we say power, or

1952
02:29:37.040 --> 02:29:41.959
we say hand, there is no
difference in terms of predicating those things of

1953
02:29:43.000 --> 02:29:46.920
God and predicating those things of creation. Our position is that there's a similarity

1954
02:29:46.959 --> 02:29:52.600
in meaning and that there's no similarity
in ontology. You got it. This

1955
02:29:52.639 --> 02:29:58.319
one coming in from and each nurse
says, did Muhammad destroy Allah's idol with

1956
02:30:00.360 --> 02:30:07.760
balls? I don't know what that's
talking about. Neither my Zabibo's trajectory says

1957
02:30:07.799 --> 02:30:13.760
if I text you the way,
see that's weird. Mjasons. Can Jay

1958
02:30:13.760 --> 02:30:18.440
give an example of anything else that
is counted differently, as in the case

1959
02:30:18.520 --> 02:30:24.200
of Trinity, we have three persons, one nature, but yet one God.

1960
02:30:26.120 --> 02:30:28.520
I don't understand the question is is
there something that we are there things

1961
02:30:28.520 --> 02:30:33.760
that we count in different ways,
or can I give examples the way that

1962
02:30:33.799 --> 02:30:37.360
we count God in different ways?
Because what I argue was that if you

1963
02:30:37.399 --> 02:30:41.120
look at medieval philosophy, there's first
order in position, second order in position.

1964
02:30:41.159 --> 02:30:45.920
First order position is counting things that
are mundane like cows and dogs,

1965
02:30:46.879 --> 02:30:50.520
and then second order in position is
counting abstract things like walls of logic or

1966
02:30:50.559 --> 02:30:56.000
sets. And so, for example, concrete things we would count by division,

1967
02:30:56.079 --> 02:30:58.840
and abstract things we would count by
identity. So even in the Middle

1968
02:30:58.840 --> 02:31:03.159
Eight people counted in different ways.
So it's odd to me that the whole

1969
02:31:03.280 --> 02:31:07.440
argument tonight was premised on we only
count in one way, and that's counting

1970
02:31:07.440 --> 02:31:11.719
by identity, which is why I
said that if Jake counts by identity,

1971
02:31:11.959 --> 02:31:16.799
then he has missed many necessary beings
in his account of the attributes. Got

1972
02:31:16.840 --> 02:31:20.079
it? This one from the Chelsekian
says, when Alla comes down the third

1973
02:31:20.120 --> 02:31:24.280
part of the night to answer prayers, that means that either Allah is like

1974
02:31:24.399 --> 02:31:28.879
a yo yo because Earth is a
globe, or that Muhammad thought that the

1975
02:31:28.920 --> 02:31:33.879
Earth was flat. I think this
is for you, Jake. No,

1976
02:31:35.000 --> 02:31:39.319
that's incorrect, because again they're going
into the kafia or the howness of the

1977
02:31:39.360 --> 02:31:45.079
descent, which we don't and we
don't actually make the claim that it is

1978
02:31:45.200 --> 02:31:50.920
a movement necessarily from one spatial location
to the another. In a similar manner

1979
02:31:50.200 --> 02:31:56.000
that Jay Dyer believes that the attributes
or energies descend upon creation, and he

1980
02:31:56.079 --> 02:32:01.959
doesn't imagine that they're like ripping off
a piece of and and and somehow coming

1981
02:32:03.079 --> 02:32:07.120
into creation and a landing on a
human being. So this is just a

1982
02:32:07.200 --> 02:32:11.319
misunderstanding of our position. You got
it? This one coming in from Do

1983
02:32:11.319 --> 02:32:16.799
you appreciate it? Ahmed, says
Jake alu Akbar. Great job, MJ

1984
02:32:16.959 --> 02:32:22.920
says, Can Jay give an example
of anything else that is counted differently as

1985
02:32:22.959 --> 02:32:26.959
in the case of trinity. We
have three persons, one nature, but

1986
02:32:26.040 --> 02:32:31.239
yet one God. I think that's
like the last question, the question sorry

1987
02:32:31.239 --> 02:32:39.040
about that Matt Belcher's is Michael loft
And dressed as a Muslim? I don't

1988
02:32:39.159 --> 02:32:43.719
understand this one from buddy, who's
your friend? Michael? Okay, GBT

1989
02:32:45.360 --> 02:32:48.360
zero point one two says, let's
see, I don't think Michael Lofton has

1990
02:32:48.440 --> 02:32:54.760
any friends on this stream. This
one coming in from do appreciate it?

1991
02:32:54.799 --> 02:33:00.319
Famos, says Jay. Answer without
they say, how can an unlimited infinite

1992
02:33:00.399 --> 02:33:05.399
being I E. God be finite
e I E. Jesus and infinite I

1993
02:33:05.559 --> 02:33:09.200
E. God at the same time. Yeah, well, this is what

1994
02:33:09.280 --> 02:33:15.239
we talked about earlier with mode.
And so the mode that Jesus entered into

1995
02:33:15.440 --> 02:33:20.600
is a new mode of being,
which the Book of Philippians describes as a

1996
02:33:20.639 --> 02:33:24.319
willful non exercising of every one of
his attributes. I think that Jake himself

1997
02:33:24.319 --> 02:33:28.280
has argued in the past that God
doesn't have to exercise every power and every

1998
02:33:28.879 --> 02:33:31.559
attribute of creating at all times.
And so in the same way, we

1999
02:33:31.639 --> 02:33:35.959
just simply say that the second person
of the God had stepped into the mode

2000
02:33:35.959 --> 02:33:41.520
of human nature while still having the
divine nature. So he didn't lose his

2001
02:33:41.639 --> 02:33:46.559
deity, he didn't undergo any change, he didn't become the opposite of himself.

2002
02:33:46.879 --> 02:33:50.159
We believe a both and rather than
either or. You got it.

2003
02:33:50.600 --> 02:33:54.159
This one coming in from just want
to remind you folks, we are looking

2004
02:33:54.159 --> 02:33:58.440
for sincere questions, not statements that. I don't know why these guys would

2005
02:33:58.440 --> 02:34:01.319
pay a lot of money just to
not a question up there. It's just

2006
02:34:01.399 --> 02:34:05.760
silly. I don't either they're asking, they're saying all sorts of things.

2007
02:34:05.840 --> 02:34:09.280
But this one from John, this
is one. We got this on money.

2008
02:34:09.360 --> 02:34:15.760
Basia says Jay, how do you
worship Jesus without worshiping his human nature?

2009
02:34:15.920 --> 02:34:20.200
Don't you have to worship the created
human nature when you worship the person

2010
02:34:20.239 --> 02:34:26.360
of Jesus, which even Christians would
consider idolatry. Well, this is addressed

2011
02:34:26.360 --> 02:34:30.479
in St. Cyril and the Council
of Ephesus, because it's an argument that

2012
02:34:30.639 --> 02:34:37.360
Nestorius makes, And interestingly, the
Islamic or Oxtrad Handbook of Islam notes that

2013
02:34:37.399 --> 02:34:41.000
there is in fact a historian influence
on Islam. So I don't fault him

2014
02:34:41.040 --> 02:34:45.079
for making that mistake or thinking that
way, But the answer is just simply

2015
02:34:45.120 --> 02:34:50.319
that. Cyril says that we don't
worship the creature per creature. We direct

2016
02:34:50.399 --> 02:34:56.120
all of our worship to the divine
hypostasis, and we give him a holistic

2017
02:34:56.159 --> 02:35:00.280
worship as the whole being, because
it's the body of the word. Don't

2018
02:35:00.280 --> 02:35:03.280
worship the body of Christ or the
human nature of Christ in any divided or

2019
02:35:03.360 --> 02:35:09.719
separate way, but we worship the
god Man who is also incarnate. You

2020
02:35:09.879 --> 02:35:13.600
got it this one. I'll read
the appropriate part. They say, guys,

2021
02:35:13.680 --> 02:35:20.479
it's read Go join Gigi slash Soony. By the way, I'm six

2022
02:35:20.520 --> 02:35:26.040
foot seven. Okay, then I
don't know, sir this, susse says.

2023
02:35:26.639 --> 02:35:33.799
Discord dot gg slash Soony says,
join the Debate Review. So if

2024
02:35:33.879 --> 02:35:35.479
yeah, we're happy to share about
debate reviews, folks, if you want

2025
02:35:35.479 --> 02:35:39.600
to go check that out, go
have a conversation there, uh, sussep

2026
02:35:39.280 --> 02:35:48.639
says. They say, okay,
John Michael b says. Jake says,

2027
02:35:48.680 --> 02:35:52.600
we are polytheist because you know we
follow Pigan. We got that one,

2028
02:35:52.920 --> 02:36:01.200
maneeb Zia says, Jay got that. Ab just shook her, says Jay,

2029
02:36:01.079 --> 02:36:07.079
how have you actually read authority position? Because when Jake asked you simple

2030
02:36:07.200 --> 02:36:13.840
questions yes or no, you have
hard time answering yes or no. Well,

2031
02:36:13.879 --> 02:36:20.319
for example, when he asked about
whether even to me believes in occasionalism

2032
02:36:20.479 --> 02:36:24.120
or secondary causes, I was trying
to remember the specific page in the Foreigner

2033
02:36:24.159 --> 02:36:28.719
page book which I did read,
which says he doesn't believe in occasionalism.

2034
02:36:28.840 --> 02:36:33.959
So I was trying to accurately give
the position. And so the answer is

2035
02:36:33.959 --> 02:36:37.120
no, he doesn't believe in occasionalism. That's why I said specifically that he

2036
02:36:37.159 --> 02:36:41.920
does allow for creative causes. You
got it this one from Giant Media,

2037
02:36:41.000 --> 02:36:45.799
or says Jake. If Alan's foot, I think you mean all his foot

2038
02:36:46.079 --> 02:36:50.799
and hands and other attributes quote unquote
are not divisions of Allah, but each

2039
02:36:50.840 --> 02:36:56.440
one is an identity? Is I
think? Now, No, there wasn't

2040
02:36:56.440 --> 02:37:00.479
a mistake. They're saying Alan on
purpose. I think they say if Allan's

2041
02:37:00.479 --> 02:37:03.520
foot, in, hands and other
attributes are not divisions of Allen, but

2042
02:37:03.639 --> 02:37:11.360
each one is an identity? Is
each one the whole of Allen? Yeah,

2043
02:37:11.399 --> 02:37:15.760
so obviously he's talking about Allah.
I don't know what's his Alan business,

2044
02:37:15.760 --> 02:37:18.920
but we believe that the attributes,
all of the attributes, And I

2045
02:37:20.159 --> 02:37:24.040
repeat it again we don't believe their
body parts. So you can keep saying

2046
02:37:24.120 --> 02:37:26.959
that we believe their body parts,
but we don't believe that. This is

2047
02:37:26.040 --> 02:37:31.079
explicit in all of our texts,
so it's just misrepresentation. But they are.

2048
02:37:31.319 --> 02:37:35.760
We believe they're inseparable from the essence, right, just as God's power

2049
02:37:35.879 --> 02:37:41.120
and knowledge. They're all inseparable from
the essence. It's not like God's knowledge

2050
02:37:41.120 --> 02:37:45.440
starts floating around and comes and drifts
down to earth and we don't believe that.

2051
02:37:45.520 --> 02:37:50.040
So just a misunderstanding of the position. I'muel, says Jake, I

2052
02:37:50.079 --> 02:37:52.920
love you, remember Jesus King and
Joe, You're weird? And Derek,

2053
02:37:54.040 --> 02:37:58.040
let's play fortnite. Susep says Justin
in his dialogue, makes it clear that

2054
02:37:58.079 --> 02:38:05.479
the Father can incarnate. This is
clear subordinationism, showing he believed the Father

2055
02:38:05.600 --> 02:38:09.680
had a level of greatness in his
personhood where he can't incarnate. Do you

2056
02:38:09.760 --> 02:38:16.559
pray to a heretic? Is that
a question to me? I guess I

2057
02:38:15.920 --> 02:38:20.920
think I know you don't pray to
just well, it was it was it

2058
02:38:20.959 --> 02:38:26.959
was phrased odd. Yeah, So, like I said, I mean the

2059
02:38:26.959 --> 02:38:28.719
the Father. The reason I said
that we don't know is that. I'm

2060
02:38:28.760 --> 02:38:37.399
not aware of any statement where we're
told by divine revelation that the Father could

2061
02:38:37.440 --> 02:38:41.879
not incarnate. But there are the
alphantic manifestations where we have the Father,

2062
02:38:41.440 --> 02:38:46.280
you know, speaking to the son, but that's an energetic manifestation. But

2063
02:38:46.520 --> 02:38:48.959
like I said, Jesus says that, you know, no one sees the

2064
02:38:48.000 --> 02:38:52.879
Father at any time. So just
like the divine essence is not perceived or

2065
02:38:52.920 --> 02:38:56.440
seen, we don't think that the
Father is directly seen or perceived, except

2066
02:38:56.440 --> 02:39:01.440
as Jesus says, in the Son. So I don't see what that's a

2067
02:39:01.520 --> 02:39:07.479
problem really for our theology. I
mean, it's not if Justin Martin makes

2068
02:39:07.479 --> 02:39:09.559
a mistake like that, I would
class it as the same type of mistake,

2069
02:39:09.600 --> 02:39:13.959
but Augustine makes can I just asked
Jay a quick question about that.

2070
02:39:13.600 --> 02:39:20.360
Are there disputes and orthodoxy amongst the
scholars about whether or not the Father can

2071
02:39:20.479 --> 02:39:26.639
become incarnate? No, just a
genuine question. I'm just asking. No,

2072
02:39:26.719 --> 02:39:30.639
I'm just was thinking about first Ofvine
revelation. I'm aware of what you're

2073
02:39:30.639 --> 02:39:35.399
talking about in terms of what John
Damascus talks about, but I was just

2074
02:39:35.399 --> 02:39:39.680
trying to think about what they might
be referring to which is like we have

2075
02:39:39.760 --> 02:39:43.559
stories or we have a case like
where when Jesus baptized, right, the

2076
02:39:43.600 --> 02:39:46.840
father says, this is my beloved
son. So somebody might think that that's

2077
02:39:46.799 --> 02:39:50.559
the Father entering into creation. But
in our theology, we don't think the

2078
02:39:50.600 --> 02:39:56.920
Father enters into creation in that way
other than it's an energetic manifestation that tells

2079
02:39:56.000 --> 02:40:00.399
us about the Father, but it's
not the person of the Father. Okay,

2080
02:40:00.920 --> 02:40:03.719
this one from Jack Hoggs says Allah
is completely unlike created things. But

2081
02:40:03.840 --> 02:40:11.479
yes, created things can etiquette of
Allah. Yeah, as I've explained numerous

2082
02:40:11.520 --> 02:40:16.479
times, this hinges on our and
Jay's right to point out. I'm happy

2083
02:40:16.559 --> 02:40:22.799
that we that was actually part of
the conversation nominalism, but they keep focusing

2084
02:40:22.920 --> 02:40:26.559
on God. What the But what
these people don't understand if they actually study

2085
02:40:26.799 --> 02:40:35.040
nominalism. I believe that there is
no shared reality between my hand and Jay's

2086
02:40:35.040 --> 02:40:39.200
hand. I don't believe that there
is this thing called handness which is partially

2087
02:40:39.360 --> 02:40:43.040
or fully identical in my hand and
Jay's hand, or my knowledge and Jay's

2088
02:40:43.040 --> 02:40:48.559
knowledge. Everything that exists is a
particular So there's nothing unique about this.

2089
02:40:48.799 --> 02:40:54.280
When it comes to a law or
human beings. So people understand that this

2090
02:40:54.360 --> 02:40:58.799
is a debatable point, but it
seems like they're not even aware of what

2091
02:41:00.000 --> 02:41:03.680
anomalism even is. So from Beyond
Doubt theology says, Jay, you have

2092
02:41:03.760 --> 02:41:07.719
a problem with God having a foot, But if you can say God died

2093
02:41:09.000 --> 02:41:13.760
in parentheses Council of Ephesus, can't
you say that God or Jesus in particular

2094
02:41:13.879 --> 02:41:20.639
had feet. Yeah. So the
internal critique was the first part about how

2095
02:41:20.920 --> 02:41:24.440
when Jake gives an account or when
even to me it gives an account of

2096
02:41:24.840 --> 02:41:30.280
the semantic content that's supposed to be
similar in terms of quote meaning, that

2097
02:41:30.360 --> 02:41:33.840
actually ends up telling us nothing about
what that actually is. That was the

2098
02:41:33.840 --> 02:41:37.319
force of my argument in terms of
an internal critique of his position. But

2099
02:41:37.399 --> 02:41:41.520
it is true that in our theology
you could say that by appropriation or by

2100
02:41:41.559 --> 02:41:46.399
what Cyril calls the communication communicatio idio
modern or the communication of properties, that

2101
02:41:48.399 --> 02:41:50.840
God the Son died. It doesn't
mean that he died in his divine nature

2102
02:41:52.000 --> 02:41:56.159
or the underwent change, or that
the divinity became passable. It just simply

2103
02:41:56.200 --> 02:42:00.000
means that the subject to the divine
person, the son, experienced the seventh

2104
02:42:00.040 --> 02:42:03.959
bring of his human soul. From
his human body. You got it?

2105
02:42:03.959 --> 02:42:09.399
This one coming in from Jack Hoggs
says, got that one imagination, says

2106
02:42:09.479 --> 02:42:13.319
Jake. You cannot have your own
definitions and tell Jay to respond by using

2107
02:42:13.360 --> 02:42:18.440
them. It's utterly ridiculous. Allah
means a fake by my definition. Could

2108
02:42:18.479 --> 02:42:24.559
you please prove Allah is real?
I mean, that's a strange question their

2109
02:42:24.680 --> 02:42:30.639
or statement. But obviously, my
theory of a language and theory of meaning

2110
02:42:30.719 --> 02:42:33.479
is entirely different. I believe that
the meaning of a word, or a

2111
02:42:33.600 --> 02:42:39.159
sentence or a phrase is based on
the intention of the speaker. Okay,

2112
02:42:39.200 --> 02:42:43.040
So when I ask about what power
is or what this is, and then

2113
02:42:43.079 --> 02:42:46.520
I explain my intention of what the
meaning is, you can answer according to

2114
02:42:46.559 --> 02:42:50.159
that, and you can say,
oh, but I don't use the word

2115
02:42:50.200 --> 02:42:52.920
that way, and given another answer. So there's no problem with that whatsoever.

2116
02:42:54.479 --> 02:42:56.079
Well, except that you tried to
say that I have to accept that

2117
02:42:56.120 --> 02:43:01.120
meaning. I mean, got it? This one coming in from appreciate it

2118
02:43:01.879 --> 02:43:07.760
all, mass see, he says
to Jake. Even Kamia brings Sahi in

2119
02:43:07.879 --> 02:43:15.399
his book that Mohammad sits with Allah, where rsh Percy trembles. Since you

2120
02:43:15.440 --> 02:43:20.920
pray to Allah, how are you
not polytheists. Since I pray to Allah,

2121
02:43:20.959 --> 02:43:24.319
how am I not a polytheist?
I mean, how is that even

2122
02:43:24.399 --> 02:43:28.680
connected to the first part of what
he said? I have no idea.

2123
02:43:28.239 --> 02:43:33.479
And since Jay is making comments on
the backhand of my statements, then I

2124
02:43:33.520 --> 02:43:37.360
would make a comment on the backhand
of his questions. And just as the

2125
02:43:37.520 --> 02:43:45.159
questioner was asking before about predications and
the communication of idioms or attributes, likewise,

2126
02:43:45.399 --> 02:43:48.440
Jay can appropriately say that God has
a penis. There's no problem with

2127
02:43:48.479 --> 02:43:54.079
that whatsoever. This one from i'mule
says I was low key having doubts.

2128
02:43:54.360 --> 02:43:58.399
Then I remember Jesus as God.
Now I'm gonna give doubts. Hi,

2129
02:43:58.479 --> 02:44:03.600
Derek, I love you and you
as well. Joe Matt Schneider said,

2130
02:44:03.680 --> 02:44:05.360
Jake, if you were on the
north pole and Jay was on the cell

2131
02:44:05.440 --> 02:44:11.280
pole, could you both point toward
Allah. Yes, we don't believe space

2132
02:44:11.639 --> 02:44:18.239
is an actual thing. It's relative. But he believes that you can point

2133
02:44:18.440 --> 02:44:20.559
up to Allah. And we believe
that God is on the present. He's

2134
02:44:20.559 --> 02:44:26.920
not in a spatial location. Up
is a spatial location. This depends what

2135
02:44:26.959 --> 02:44:31.239
you mean by spatial location. But
we can go back up. No,

2136
02:44:31.040 --> 02:44:37.760
like space, you believe you do
believe is a space space in an Aristatilian

2137
02:44:37.879 --> 02:44:41.440
sense of encompassing. In your sense, you believe that you can point up

2138
02:44:41.479 --> 02:44:43.319
to Allah. You said it to
Khalil. I already I already just said

2139
02:44:43.360 --> 02:44:46.799
that right here in my answer.
Right that's spatially direct. You don't think

2140
02:44:46.799 --> 02:44:52.280
app is a spatial direction. We
believe in a jiha or a direction.

2141
02:44:52.559 --> 02:44:58.239
But when you use space, when
you use when you use spatial, it

2142
02:44:58.280 --> 02:45:01.319
depends on what you mean by space. Yeah, so a new definition of

2143
02:45:01.360 --> 02:45:05.959
space, that's too. We have
an Aristotelian definition of space. Oh interesting,

2144
02:45:07.760 --> 02:45:11.719
So it's okay to use the medieval
things here, But what about counting

2145
02:45:11.760 --> 02:45:15.239
has to be post fraga? I
never said that. What are you talking

2146
02:45:15.239 --> 02:45:18.040
about? My critique was that you're
inconsistent in your counting method, but you

2147
02:45:18.079 --> 02:45:22.600
don't have a you're a consistent because
you count, you count the attributes.

2148
02:45:22.600 --> 02:45:24.399
By then I already showed you that
you look like a fool because you have

2149
02:45:24.760 --> 02:45:26.879
so now you have to you have
to go to ad home and then when

2150
02:45:26.920 --> 02:45:31.319
I pin you down again, when
you did what when I pin you down,

2151
02:45:31.360 --> 02:45:33.319
you have to go to at home
and you will pin me down.

2152
02:45:33.399 --> 02:45:39.440
You because you count by identity I
hate to do this. Necessary do count

2153
02:45:39.440 --> 02:45:43.280
by identity? Awesome? You have
multiple necessary beings? No, we don't.

2154
02:45:43.600 --> 02:45:46.799
We must move, they say,
question for Jake, Please ask this.

2155
02:45:48.040 --> 02:45:52.159
James, does Islam teach that Jesus
is the nephew of Aaron and Moses?

2156
02:45:52.799 --> 02:45:56.440
Sorry, say that again? Is
he does Islam teach that Jesus is

2157
02:45:56.479 --> 02:46:03.680
the nephew of Aaron and Moses?
No? This one from James, says,

2158
02:46:03.959 --> 02:46:09.600
can Jake quote unquote tell us why
Allah being called quote the one the

2159
02:46:09.639 --> 02:46:18.799
absolute is not blatant mimicry of bhutone
plotinus karan through two. Thank you.

2160
02:46:20.479 --> 02:46:24.959
We don't believe that a loss of
panotada is the one or absolute in the

2161
02:46:24.000 --> 02:46:31.440
way that Platinas said, Platinus believed
in a complete uh, in divine simplicity

2162
02:46:31.440 --> 02:46:35.280
in a radical sense. We don't
believe in that whatsoever. So it's a

2163
02:46:35.360 --> 02:46:41.440
complete uh misunderstanding of our actual position. This one coming from so, says

2164
02:46:41.479 --> 02:46:45.159
says Jake. Does Allah act in
time or is he timeless? How does

2165
02:46:45.200 --> 02:46:52.239
the doctrine affect immutability? The full
falsapha adhere to true tahed uh if you

2166
02:46:52.319 --> 02:46:56.799
mean by the philosopher's ibn sina,
we believe that he was a Kaffre.

2167
02:46:56.239 --> 02:47:00.840
Uh So, I'm sorry to tell
you for for for the questioner. We

2168
02:47:00.879 --> 02:47:03.120
don't believe he was a Muslim in
that sense, unless you take the theory

2169
02:47:03.159 --> 02:47:09.040
that he repented later in life.
But nevertheless, I forgot what the first

2170
02:47:09.079 --> 02:47:15.479
part of that question was. Besides
the philosophers to oh, yeah, I'm

2171
02:47:15.520 --> 02:47:18.719
surprised that Jay didn't actually that.
I wish we would have had a chance

2172
02:47:18.760 --> 02:47:22.520
to go through this more. If
you mean by does a loss of panet

2173
02:47:22.520 --> 02:47:26.120
out to act in time, then
yes, we believe that he acts in

2174
02:47:26.159 --> 02:47:31.000
succession that he has and this was
actually and I mentioned this. Jay and

2175
02:47:31.000 --> 02:47:33.879
I don't agree on any things,
but in my debate review of his debate

2176
02:47:33.920 --> 02:47:39.079
with us Rah Rashid, I think
this is a serious problem that he highlighted

2177
02:47:39.840 --> 02:47:46.440
very effectively in pointing out that the
Ashatas don't believe that the attributes of action

2178
02:47:46.719 --> 02:47:52.959
are actually divine attributes. They say
that Allah's actions simply refer to his created

2179
02:47:52.000 --> 02:47:56.760
effects. We think this is complete
nonsense. No, we believe that his

2180
02:47:56.200 --> 02:48:03.920
actions are actual attributes or in a
language of Eastern Orthodoxy, our energies,

2181
02:48:03.120 --> 02:48:07.760
and they can have a beginning in
time and yet are uncreated. And I

2182
02:48:07.799 --> 02:48:13.280
gave support from that from Imam Bucati
in my opening presentation. This one from

2183
02:48:15.280 --> 02:48:20.879
Alexander says, why does Allah have
two right hands? Why does he have

2184
02:48:20.920 --> 02:48:24.520
two right hands? I mean,
it's just a silly question if you actually

2185
02:48:24.559 --> 02:48:30.959
read the text and understand why the
term right is used. Wright is used

2186
02:48:30.959 --> 02:48:35.840
in terms of blessing. So we
believe that the blessings pour forth from a

2187
02:48:35.920 --> 02:48:39.120
loss of pano Ada's hands. That's
the meaning of the term, which I

2188
02:48:39.200 --> 02:48:43.600
have videos on my channel explaining that
this is a standard tough sier or explanation

2189
02:48:43.680 --> 02:48:50.360
of those ahadith. I'm yul says, I'm currently tking. Matt Belcher says,

2190
02:48:50.440 --> 02:48:54.600
Jake. If Allah is the only
eternal, then why is the Kuran

2191
02:48:54.719 --> 02:48:58.600
also said to be eternal? Again, this is something I corrected Jay on

2192
02:48:58.639 --> 02:49:03.319
them prized when he thought that I
believe that the put Ann is eternal.

2193
02:49:03.680 --> 02:49:05.159
I didn't believe that. I just
said, I wasn't talking about that.

2194
02:49:05.559 --> 02:49:07.959
You did, no, I said, I wasn't talking about it. You

2195
02:49:09.000 --> 02:49:11.200
can go back. You can go
back to the tape and look at it

2196
02:49:11.239 --> 02:49:13.559
yourself. I said, I don't
know what your position is there. I

2197
02:49:13.600 --> 02:49:16.280
didn't say you believed that. Okay, you don't know what my position is.

2198
02:49:16.280 --> 02:49:18.360
What's explained in the text. We
don't say that the put An is

2199
02:49:18.399 --> 02:49:22.200
eternal in terms of a speech act. We believe that it was spoken in

2200
02:49:22.319 --> 02:49:26.879
time to the angel Jabrilani, he
said, i'm and then to the prophet

2201
02:49:26.920 --> 02:49:30.639
muhammad Ad he said said, I'm
so. We don't believe that it is

2202
02:49:30.760 --> 02:49:35.559
eternal in that sense, only eternal
in the sense of within God's knowledge that

2203
02:49:35.639 --> 02:49:39.200
he knew what he would speak.
But the act of speech itself happens at

2204
02:49:39.200 --> 02:49:45.040
a particular moment in time. You
got it this one coming in from do

2205
02:49:45.120 --> 02:49:48.319
appreciate it? Sojournon, says jacob
Alla. His hand is something that grabs

2206
02:49:48.360 --> 02:49:54.440
what is all of shin God.
This is just ridiculous questions. And anyway,

2207
02:49:54.440 --> 02:49:58.040
thirty mon he thinks they're ridiculous because
they don't want to deal with these.

2208
02:49:58.680 --> 02:50:01.760
No, I've answered how many times
have I answered questions about a lot's

2209
02:50:01.799 --> 02:50:09.719
hand a lost foot? Every single
time it does it does. I've explained

2210
02:50:09.719 --> 02:50:13.760
the meaning several times over and over. Everybody focuses on this because your explanations

2211
02:50:13.799 --> 02:50:16.440
are terrible. That's why they focus
on it. Jake. No, it's

2212
02:50:16.479 --> 02:50:20.799
because you guys don't understand the basics
of what I'm talking about. When I

2213
02:50:20.840 --> 02:50:24.559
say that it's a nominalist predictor that
you can have you can have a shared

2214
02:50:24.719 --> 02:50:28.719
meaning, which I gave the meaning, and I said the meaning is known

2215
02:50:30.079 --> 02:50:33.600
through the text, and I gave
examples of that. And then you say,

2216
02:50:33.799 --> 02:50:37.399
and I buried that. Yeah,
because of your you didn't You didn't

2217
02:50:37.440 --> 02:50:41.040
nail me. But Jay, you
don't even know the basic critics. I

2218
02:50:41.079 --> 02:50:46.479
do know the basic critics. You
don't know the basic critiques of your So

2219
02:50:46.520 --> 02:50:50.559
you don't have logical laws. Don't
you don't have logical laws. But just

2220
02:50:50.559 --> 02:50:54.559
to go, Yeah, Jake can't
control himself. He has to interrupt it

2221
02:50:54.600 --> 02:51:00.559
every moment, said Jake. If
all his hand is on thing that grabs,

2222
02:51:00.600 --> 02:51:03.879
what is all his shi? Yeah, I just already respond to this

2223
02:51:03.959 --> 02:51:09.040
question. You got responded to it
five times already, Moose says j Do

2224
02:51:09.120 --> 02:51:18.200
you support all gbt Q plus and
you should believe in progressive Christianity? What

2225
02:51:18.239 --> 02:51:22.079
I think this person is a troll, But I'll give you a chance.

2226
02:51:22.520 --> 02:51:26.559
It's just the way they spelt progressive. But I could be wrong. Ja,

2227
02:51:26.879 --> 02:51:30.600
do you support well it was a
statement that I should or what was

2228
02:51:30.600 --> 02:51:33.159
it? A question? Do I
know? Don't we think? That's this

2229
02:51:33.280 --> 02:51:43.280
one from Habik Mohammed says, okay, nothing about spanking giant meteor, says

2230
02:51:43.360 --> 02:51:46.719
Jake. You didn't answer my question. I didn't say that all his hands

2231
02:51:46.079 --> 02:51:50.200
and foot are body parts. I
asked if they are counted by division?

2232
02:51:50.520 --> 02:51:54.840
But our identities are each one of
them, the whole of Allah. They're

2233
02:51:54.879 --> 02:52:00.920
not counted by division. I already
explained that they're inseparable, and yet we

2234
02:52:01.040 --> 02:52:05.079
count them. They're inseparable, and
yet we count them as more than one.

2235
02:52:05.479 --> 02:52:11.120
That means we are counting them by
identity, which I so multiple necessary.

2236
02:52:11.360 --> 02:52:16.079
They're not most of the multiple necessary
beings? Are they? Are they

2237
02:52:16.120 --> 02:52:20.719
necessary? You continually? You continually
can't control yourself. You have to answer

2238
02:52:22.840 --> 02:52:26.600
so then so then if I do
that on every time you answer the question,

2239
02:52:26.639 --> 02:52:28.280
it's okay, right, I don't
care. Okay, Well, then

2240
02:52:28.600 --> 02:52:31.799
stick to the rules. We already
establish the rules, and you keep going

2241
02:52:31.840 --> 02:52:37.680
off the rules. I do want
to I I sympathize with you, Jay,

2242
02:52:37.719 --> 02:52:41.239
because I know that there are way
more questions for Jake, and it's

2243
02:52:41.799 --> 02:52:43.760
I would like you, but so
many things Jay says, don't you think

2244
02:52:43.760 --> 02:52:46.559
I would love to respect? Oh? I know, don't worry. I'm

2245
02:52:46.600 --> 02:52:50.600
getting there. What I was saying. I sympathize Jay. I understand that

2246
02:52:52.040 --> 02:52:54.600
we have to have consistent rules.
Either Jay's gonna abide by them or you

2247
02:52:54.680 --> 02:53:00.559
allow me to Jake. I'm I'm
agreeing. I'm trying to basically give a

2248
02:53:00.959 --> 02:53:03.440
like a rebuke to Jay right now. I'm just saying, Jay, I

2249
02:53:03.479 --> 02:53:07.600
know that it's kind of boring when
they're like a million questions for Jake,

2250
02:53:07.959 --> 02:53:11.799
But to be fair, I do
want to keep it so that we're not

2251
02:53:11.200 --> 02:53:16.360
having any sort of teaming up on
Jake. This one from Cataclysm says to

2252
02:53:16.440 --> 02:53:24.319
Jake, does Salafism hold normative authority
to dogmatize an anathemize theology? I e.

2253
02:53:24.399 --> 02:53:31.479
Ashari occasionalism Allah creates absolutely everything,
making all of the worst being with

2254
02:53:31.959 --> 02:53:39.799
prayer under an ashari a mom be
valid. Okay, So you're mixing two

2255
02:53:39.879 --> 02:53:45.239
things. You're asking about prayer behind
in a Shadi imam, which is a

2256
02:53:45.319 --> 02:53:50.159
question of fit, not merely a
Kaida, and when you talk about the

2257
02:53:50.319 --> 02:53:54.360
Shadi position on occasionalism, we believe
that they're completely wrong and that it's a

2258
02:53:54.399 --> 02:53:58.920
deviant position because it goes against the
clear text of the put On and Sun,

2259
02:54:00.559 --> 02:54:05.319
and it also goes against reason,
which again, and I don't think

2260
02:54:05.399 --> 02:54:09.360
Jay and I are very much friends
here, but I have to point out

2261
02:54:09.360 --> 02:54:15.440
that he hammered as Rabashid on the
same point in the debate when he made

2262
02:54:15.479 --> 02:54:18.239
the point which is a similar point
that I would make, and which I

2263
02:54:18.239 --> 02:54:22.040
don't know why they can't understand that
they make an argument based on causation or

2264
02:54:22.159 --> 02:54:26.840
causal chains to prove that God exists, and then when you get there,

2265
02:54:26.879 --> 02:54:30.879
they say, oh, by the
way, all of those causal chains are

2266
02:54:30.879 --> 02:54:35.520
not real, so it's just a
complete falsehood. From Christ to four,

2267
02:54:35.600 --> 02:54:39.280
oh says, why did Mohammad get
married the mother of Jesus and married the

2268
02:54:39.319 --> 02:54:46.760
sister of Moses? And Aaron confused? Say repeat the question, say why

2269
02:54:46.799 --> 02:54:52.120
did Mohammad get married the mother of
Jesus and marry the sister of Moses?

2270
02:54:52.559 --> 02:54:58.000
And Aaron confused? I'm not aware
of him getting them confused. I mean,

2271
02:54:58.040 --> 02:55:03.040
you have to go into more detail
about the This one from habitc Aboo,

2272
02:55:03.159 --> 02:55:07.280
Mahammad says one hundred dollars of j
can name more than five books on

2273
02:55:07.520 --> 02:55:16.840
Jake's position. Jake what they technically
said Jack's position, which I don't understand.

2274
02:55:18.360 --> 02:55:22.280
Yeah, it's all right. My
Italian family still calls me Jack.

2275
02:55:22.319 --> 02:55:26.719
They can't pronounce Jake for some reason. So is what it is. But

2276
02:55:26.799 --> 02:55:30.840
anyway, what's the question, what
are we doing? They said, one

2277
02:55:30.879 --> 02:55:35.879
hundred dollars of j can name more
than five books on Jack's position. Oh,

2278
02:55:35.959 --> 02:55:39.319
so that's for Jake, that's for
me. So I have let's see

2279
02:55:41.200 --> 02:55:43.680
one, two, three, four, So I have four books here with

2280
02:55:43.760 --> 02:55:48.079
me. So that would be the
critique critique of the Palmerian Creed, which

2281
02:55:48.120 --> 02:55:52.120
is not his position, but on
his position. I have the even to

2282
02:55:52.159 --> 02:55:56.280
me a book one ess of God. I have the soule Mond book what

2283
02:55:56.399 --> 02:56:03.360
we're talking about today with the quotes. So, and then I've got all

2284
02:56:03.399 --> 02:56:11.079
of the unbelief chapters in the Oxford
Handbook. So I'm sure that doesn't meet

2285
02:56:11.159 --> 02:56:15.479
the five criterion, but I don't
think I need five. Actually, good,

2286
02:56:15.479 --> 02:56:18.159
do we count the Kuran too?
This is the credit. So if

2287
02:56:18.159 --> 02:56:22.440
I count the Koran, that's five? Is that does that count? Lenland

2288
02:56:22.639 --> 02:56:26.600
said, Is Jake open to having
a debate with Sam Chamou? No?

2289
02:56:28.159 --> 02:56:31.040
Guy is out of his mind.
You got it. Let's see this one

2290
02:56:31.120 --> 02:56:37.159
from has this been thirty? I
thought it was thirty minutes of Q and

2291
02:56:37.200 --> 02:56:39.399
A. Yeah, we're going on
longer than that. But I'm just,

2292
02:56:39.639 --> 02:56:43.440
uh, I'm being patient for James
because I know that some of these are

2293
02:56:43.440 --> 02:56:46.319
probably super chats. But we're eventually
gonna have to wrap it up. I

2294
02:56:46.319 --> 02:56:48.440
mean, that's we are. We'read
the three hour mark, so we're gonna

2295
02:56:48.440 --> 02:56:50.200
wrap it up. I want to
say, folks, thank you for tuning

2296
02:56:50.200 --> 02:56:54.600
in. Check out both Jake's and
Jay's links in the description box that includes

2297
02:56:54.639 --> 02:56:58.520
if you're listening to you the podcast
later. All of the debates end up

2298
02:56:58.559 --> 02:57:01.079
on the podcast within about twenty four
hours of the debate being live, So

2299
02:57:01.120 --> 02:57:07.239
if you're listening via Spotify, Apple
Podcasts, you name it, Both Jay

2300
02:57:07.280 --> 02:57:09.920
and Jake are linked in the description
box there. Check out their links.

2301
02:57:09.959 --> 02:57:16.879
Now, there's a value in getting
to hear a person's point of view straight

2302
02:57:16.959 --> 02:57:20.120
from them, such as going to
their own videos at their own channels,

2303
02:57:20.120 --> 02:57:22.639
So I hindh they encourage you folks
check out their channels with that one to

2304
02:57:22.680 --> 02:57:24.799
say, thank you so much.
It's been a true pleasure to have you.

2305
02:57:24.799 --> 02:57:28.559
Both Jay and Jake, Thank you
guys, have a lot of fun.

2306
02:57:28.559 --> 02:57:31.799
Thank you my pleasure. Folks,
stick around. I'll be back in

2307
02:57:31.840 --> 02:57:35.920
just a moment with a post credit
scene letting you know about upcoming debates.

2308
02:57:35.239 --> 02:57:37.879
So thanks for being with us,
and I'll be back in just a moment.

2309
02:58:24.600 --> 02:58:28.920
Thanks so much for coming by,
folks. Thrilled to have you here

2310
02:58:28.959 --> 02:58:31.280
and excited. I've got to tell
you right now what I'm excited about.

2311
02:58:31.280 --> 02:58:33.840
I'm gonna show you a few things
here because you might be thinking, like,

2312
02:58:33.920 --> 02:58:37.360
huh, what are you so excited
about, James, like, tell

2313
02:58:37.399 --> 02:58:41.760
me I have to know. Well, a couple of things first is here

2314
02:58:41.799 --> 02:58:45.079
I am bottom laugh. I want
to say thanks so much for being with

2315
02:58:45.159 --> 02:58:48.479
us. If you have not already
voted in that poll, it is still

2316
02:58:48.520 --> 02:58:52.520
there waiting for you in the live
chat. You can do that right now.

2317
02:58:54.040 --> 02:58:58.440
Want to encourage you as there's been
about thirty five hundred, three thousand,

2318
02:58:58.680 --> 02:59:03.040
five hundred if I remember right last
time I chat that many votes.

2319
02:59:03.399 --> 02:59:07.399
Yeah, about that three four and
eighty two, which is huge. Do

2320
02:59:07.440 --> 02:59:09.840
you want to encourage you to check
that out? We are trying out some

2321
02:59:09.920 --> 02:59:13.879
new things here at Modern Databate.
As you see at the bottom right of

2322
02:59:13.920 --> 02:59:16.879
your screen. Let me just try
to top left, top right. There

2323
02:59:16.920 --> 02:59:20.360
you go feeing that up a little
bit. As you see at the bottom

2324
02:59:20.399 --> 02:59:24.000
right of your screen. Is that
some nights when we have a ton of

2325
02:59:24.239 --> 02:59:26.840
questions and when we have limited time
for the Q and A, we're gonna

2326
02:59:26.879 --> 02:59:31.600
do something where we're gonna try to
get to the standard questions still, namely

2327
02:59:31.639 --> 02:59:35.319
those that you just tag me and
chat with and then ask the question.

2328
02:59:35.639 --> 02:59:37.760
We're gonna still try to get to
those, but with limited time, we

2329
02:59:37.799 --> 02:59:41.360
can't guarantee it. And then those
nights we're gonna have five dollars minimum superchats.

2330
02:59:41.399 --> 02:59:46.040
So it's just a way of trying
to keep the if we especially if

2331
02:59:46.040 --> 02:59:48.760
you have two dollars super chests for
insulting people. But we also don't want

2332
02:59:48.760 --> 02:59:54.360
super chats that are frankly any amount
that insult people. But we notice that,

2333
02:59:54.239 --> 02:59:56.879
you know, not surprisingly a two
dollars super chat, you only need

2334
02:59:56.920 --> 03:00:00.680
so many characters to type in,
you know, so it's a jerk.

2335
03:00:01.559 --> 03:00:05.040
So that's one thing is we want
you could say more authentic questions, but

2336
03:00:05.159 --> 03:00:09.239
want to say we appreciate you being
here with us. I've got a lot

2337
03:00:09.280 --> 03:00:15.840
of other things to mention in particular, we actually have this Tuesday. The

2338
03:00:16.000 --> 03:00:24.760
MC tune debate last Tuesday on flat
Earth actually got nicked for the night,

2339
03:00:24.200 --> 03:00:30.200
so I do want to let you
know that is being rescheduled for this Tuesday.

2340
03:00:30.280 --> 03:00:33.200
So that's one big one. And
then the following Tuesday, Globe Face

2341
03:00:33.280 --> 03:00:37.479
will be taking on a flat Earth
or a new button in fact, so

2342
03:00:37.520 --> 03:00:39.799
you don't want to miss out on
those debates if you haven't yet hit that

2343
03:00:39.799 --> 03:00:41.639
subscribe button, as we have many
more debates. But also you might be

2344
03:00:41.680 --> 03:00:46.239
thinking, like, James, tell
me what else is going on? If

2345
03:00:46.239 --> 03:00:50.440
you didn't notice on the screen before
we started, is that right now?

2346
03:00:50.559 --> 03:00:54.120
Modern day debate is also trying something
else out in particular, folks, as

2347
03:00:54.120 --> 03:00:58.440
you can see the bottom right of
your screen, Visible Wireless as a sponsor

2348
03:00:58.520 --> 03:01:03.360
for this debate. If you are
paying more than you should if you're a

2349
03:01:03.360 --> 03:01:07.879
mobile service, this is the time
to switch over to Visible. And you're

2350
03:01:07.920 --> 03:01:09.399
like, well, James, well
how much is too much? With Visible?

2351
03:01:09.559 --> 03:01:15.239
You can get it for just twenty
dollars a month for unlimited talk,

2352
03:01:15.719 --> 03:01:20.600
unlimited text, and unlimited data for
just twenty bucks a month if you use

2353
03:01:20.639 --> 03:01:24.760
the link in the description box below. Folks, what are you waiting for

2354
03:01:24.200 --> 03:01:30.200
Save your hard earned money. Don't
let it go for thirty five dollars a

2355
03:01:30.239 --> 03:01:33.559
month for the same thing over at
Mint Mobile. Save that fifteen dollars a

2356
03:01:33.600 --> 03:01:37.159
month. Use it to go to
Chipotle. I use it to get yourself

2357
03:01:37.200 --> 03:01:39.559
some coffee, whatever it is that
you like to do instead of spending it

2358
03:01:39.600 --> 03:01:43.239
on your mobile service. So that
Visible link, if you use our link

2359
03:01:43.280 --> 03:01:48.879
below, I can tell you it
is awesome. I use Visible myself.

2360
03:01:50.000 --> 03:01:52.639
I will never promote something unless I
actually use it, and I'm a fan

2361
03:01:52.680 --> 03:01:54.879
of it, so I gotta tell
you I use it and it's amazing.

2362
03:01:56.360 --> 03:01:58.520
I'm gonna throw that link in the
old live chat and I'm gonna pin it

2363
03:02:00.000 --> 03:02:03.159
and I'm gonna wrap up that poll
with thirty five hundred votes. That is

2364
03:02:03.520 --> 03:02:09.000
huge. But want to say we
are excited about Visible being a sponsor for

2365
03:02:09.239 --> 03:02:11.719
Modern Day Debate. And I just
realized, I don't think I have that

2366
03:02:11.799 --> 03:02:16.200
link. Yeah, I don't even
have that in the description box. I'm

2367
03:02:16.200 --> 03:02:18.440
gonna grab that right now, and
I want to say thank you guys for

2368
03:02:18.479 --> 03:02:22.399
all of your support. Thanks to
your patience. Is a there's a slacken

2369
03:02:22.479 --> 03:02:26.319
on that one, but I'm gonna
grab that link now, and want to

2370
03:02:26.319 --> 03:02:30.559
say, folks, the cool thing
about visible wireless is you also have unlimited

2371
03:02:30.680 --> 03:02:35.840
hotspot data. Now. The reason
that's cool is because you could just cancel

2372
03:02:37.559 --> 03:02:43.000
your internet at home because here's the
thing. Why why have internet at home

2373
03:02:43.600 --> 03:02:46.879
when you could just say, Hey, why don't I just use my hotspot

2374
03:02:46.920 --> 03:02:50.000
on my phone and then I can
completely take out my internet bill. Let's

2375
03:02:50.000 --> 03:02:54.239
say it's sixty bucks a month,
and let's say you're paying thirty five for

2376
03:02:54.399 --> 03:02:58.280
mobile, so you could say fifteen
from your mobile bill, plus you could

2377
03:02:58.319 --> 03:03:01.920
save sixty from no longer Wi Fi. That's seventy five dollars a month,

2378
03:03:03.319 --> 03:03:07.200
which over the course of a year, that would mean nine hundred dollars of

2379
03:03:07.239 --> 03:03:11.280
savings over the course of a year. So I got to tell you,

2380
03:03:11.360 --> 03:03:15.600
folks, check out that Visible link
right now. You won't regret it.

2381
03:03:15.639 --> 03:03:20.520
You have the potential to save nine
hundred dollars over the course of a year.

2382
03:03:20.680 --> 03:03:26.040
So I just put that link for
the modern databa Visible affiliate link.

2383
03:03:26.440 --> 03:03:30.000
So for the first year, you
get twenty dollars a month. That's it.

2384
03:03:30.000 --> 03:03:35.399
It's just twenty bucks a month for
unlimited talk, unlimited text, unlimited

2385
03:03:35.479 --> 03:03:41.000
high speed data, including unlimited thanks
Shane for sharing that in the old live

2386
03:03:41.079 --> 03:03:48.559
chat, including unlimited hotspot data.
So I'm just for me. I gotta

2387
03:03:48.600 --> 03:03:52.319
tell you. I know everybody talks
about Hey, you know things are getting

2388
03:03:52.319 --> 03:03:56.319
really expensive. There are some things, it is true, there are some

2389
03:03:56.399 --> 03:04:05.360
things that are more expensive. But
mobile service is actually cheaper for me.

2390
03:04:05.440 --> 03:04:09.120
I remember when I first got on
a plan with data independently, So like

2391
03:04:09.159 --> 03:04:16.639
when I got off my parents' cell
service WiFi or not WiFi mobile service is

2392
03:04:16.840 --> 03:04:20.680
it was twenty five bucks a month
and I got unlimited talk, unlimited text,

2393
03:04:20.000 --> 03:04:24.559
and two gigs per month of high
speed data. That's it just too

2394
03:04:24.639 --> 03:04:26.760
so in other words, like you'd
blow through that. You could blow through

2395
03:04:26.760 --> 03:04:31.399
that in like a few days,
and then the rest of the month you'd

2396
03:04:31.440 --> 03:04:35.680
have just like super slow WiFi or
I should say super slow data for using

2397
03:04:35.719 --> 03:04:39.959
your phone. But now for twenty
bucks a month, so cheaper, like

2398
03:04:41.000 --> 03:04:43.360
you can get it compared to like
six years ago. That actually that wasn't

2399
03:04:43.360 --> 03:04:48.319
six years ago, that was more
like ten years ago. For ten years

2400
03:04:48.360 --> 03:04:52.040
compared to ten years ago, you
can get a better deal, and it's

2401
03:04:52.079 --> 03:04:54.639
actually cheaper than what I was paying
ten years ago. So you can stick

2402
03:04:54.680 --> 03:04:58.639
that in the face of inflation and
tell them to, you know, stick

2403
03:04:58.639 --> 03:05:03.479
that in or pipe and smoke it. Got to tell you it's huge savings.

2404
03:05:03.600 --> 03:05:07.360
I Anathema says. They switched to
Visible a few weeks ago, and

2405
03:05:07.399 --> 03:05:09.799
I am loving the savings. That's
awesome, and I love it too.

2406
03:05:09.920 --> 03:05:13.639
Actually I use Visible, I don't
get the same deal you do. Now

2407
03:05:13.719 --> 03:05:16.120
I am past that one year mark. I pay twenty five dollars a month.

2408
03:05:16.159 --> 03:05:18.559
But even then, for me,
I'm like twenty five dollars. It's

2409
03:05:18.559 --> 03:05:22.600
still better than when I was using
Mint. It's better than when I was

2410
03:05:22.680 --> 03:05:24.840
using Boost. It's better than when
I was using I think there was another

2411
03:05:24.879 --> 03:05:28.799
one I tried, like Tether or
something. I can't remember, Tello thing.

2412
03:05:28.879 --> 03:05:33.920
It is Tello, But highly encourage
you check out Visible's link if you

2413
03:05:35.000 --> 03:05:39.959
were looking for saving a few bucks
each month on your mobile service, and

2414
03:05:39.079 --> 03:05:43.120
potentially, like I said, you
could use your phone as a hotspot all

2415
03:05:43.159 --> 03:05:46.719
the time, Like whenever you get
home, just turn on the hotspot,

2416
03:05:46.200 --> 03:05:50.280
connect to your computer, to it
or whatever device you might be using,

2417
03:05:50.799 --> 03:05:54.000
and you don't even have a Wi
Fi bill anymore. Oh myn so pretty

2418
03:05:54.040 --> 03:05:56.360
cool. I gotta tell you,
I'm excited about that. I think it's

2419
03:05:56.399 --> 03:06:00.600
a great deal. I want to
encourage you to check that out. Thank

2420
03:06:00.639 --> 03:06:03.440
you guys for your support. Where
at seven hundred and fifty two likes.

2421
03:06:03.200 --> 03:06:09.319
Seriously, it means more than you
know. I'm gonna I'm gonna get some

2422
03:06:09.399 --> 03:06:13.559
rest. It's been three hours a
little over, so thank you guys for

2423
03:06:13.600 --> 03:06:15.399
coming by. I want to say
hi to you though, because I just

2424
03:06:15.440 --> 03:06:18.280
I really do enjoy this and I
do just appreciate you being here. So

2425
03:06:18.920 --> 03:06:20.840
dead alive Maniac. I see they're
in the live chat. Thanks for being

2426
03:06:20.840 --> 03:06:24.559
with us, Chica. Is it
cheek? Ammy? Let me know if

2427
03:06:24.559 --> 03:06:28.479
it's pronounced that way. Glad to
have you here, Sonya, thanks for

2428
03:06:28.520 --> 03:06:31.520
coming by. I see they're in
the old live chat. Sin Klon,

2429
03:06:31.680 --> 03:06:35.879
thanks for coming by. I see
you there, Booty Killer one two three,

2430
03:06:35.920 --> 03:06:39.520
thanks for dropping in. That's interesting. I am he thanks for coming

2431
03:06:39.520 --> 03:06:43.680
in, and Athama good to see
you as usual, as well as NYC.

2432
03:06:45.040 --> 03:06:48.239
Tom oh wait, thanks for coming
by. Norak Happy to have you

2433
03:06:48.600 --> 03:06:52.360
here, says what wow, how
could they possibly do this? That's right,

2434
03:06:52.559 --> 03:06:58.520
Visible is giving the deal of a
lifetime, and uh, you know

2435
03:06:58.600 --> 03:07:03.120
what else is cheap Netflix? Cheap
but phx five seven six, Thanks for

2436
03:07:03.159 --> 03:07:09.840
coming by, and let's see they
say modern day debate. My super chat

2437
03:07:09.920 --> 03:07:11.840
was genuine, but you skipped it. I did mention earlier if it wasn't

2438
03:07:11.840 --> 03:07:15.920
a five dollars super chat or higher. It was both on screen, and

2439
03:07:15.959 --> 03:07:20.319
I did mention it verbally throughout the
debate. So I gotta tell you you

2440
03:07:20.399 --> 03:07:24.159
got to pay a little bit closer
attention. Man Houston Euler, thanks for

2441
03:07:24.200 --> 03:07:31.239
coming by. Happy to have you, Moss Hallo, Halo Low, thanks

2442
03:07:31.239 --> 03:07:33.440
for coming by, Struggling Protestant,
Glad you're here, Sweet Bubbles, happy

2443
03:07:33.440 --> 03:07:37.399
to have you here at Karzan.
Happy you're here, Gambit, Glad to

2444
03:07:37.440 --> 03:07:39.680
have you with us, Alonzo Harris, happy here with us, win Fire,

2445
03:07:39.920 --> 03:07:46.520
thanks for coming by, Manuel Palia, Palayo Logos, thanks for coming

2446
03:07:46.559 --> 03:07:52.559
by, Caribou, thanks for dropping
in, Awesome loss and clips and mister

2447
03:07:52.639 --> 03:07:56.319
Anderson, Glad you're here, Abiel, thanks for coming by, Solid Ground.

2448
03:07:56.360 --> 03:07:58.520
Glad to have you here. A
Catholic data, am I saying all

2449
03:07:58.559 --> 03:08:03.040
right, glad that you were with
us. Jay Samurai seventy nine, thanks

2450
03:08:03.040 --> 03:08:05.440
for dropping in Krzan, Happy to
have you here, Brook Adam, thanks

2451
03:08:05.440 --> 03:08:09.440
for coming by. Chicami says is
visible any good? Yes, visible is

2452
03:08:09.440 --> 03:08:13.559
good. It's actually they use the
satellites for Verizon, so you have good

2453
03:08:13.559 --> 03:08:16.520
coverage. That's one thing I love
too, is that, like it's rare

2454
03:08:16.920 --> 03:08:20.440
that I ever get to a spot
where it's not good. So free Sean,

2455
03:08:20.639 --> 03:08:22.760
thanks for coming by. See you
there in the old live chat,

2456
03:08:22.799 --> 03:08:28.280
sim Claw, thanks for coming by, Role says your channel is growing.

2457
03:08:28.399 --> 03:08:30.600
Nice to see. Thank you so
much for your support. That means more

2458
03:08:30.639 --> 03:08:33.719
than you know. Also, I
have to tell you I am so excited

2459
03:08:33.760 --> 03:08:37.879
you guys. Thank you guys for
making modern day debate row as you have.

2460
03:08:39.159 --> 03:08:43.000
We owe it all to the debaters
and to you. Thank you for

2461
03:08:43.040 --> 03:08:46.959
sharing our debates things like that,
and thank you so much for just all

2462
03:08:46.000 --> 03:08:50.280
of your support. Let's see.
Nathamas says, good to have you back

2463
03:08:50.280 --> 03:08:52.360
to this huge debate. Brother,
I replied to your email. Was in

2464
03:08:52.360 --> 03:08:56.120
the hospital for a week. Wow. I hope you're doing okay, and

2465
03:08:56.440 --> 03:08:58.079
man, glad to have you here. Shane. I'm glad you're okay.

2466
03:08:58.319 --> 03:09:01.799
You know if you're here, We're
glad you're here. So but I'll get

2467
03:09:01.799 --> 03:09:07.000
back to your email and I appreciate
you. Appreciate you, man. Buika,

2468
03:09:07.120 --> 03:09:09.799
thanks for thanks for coming by.
Say they're in the old live chat

2469
03:09:09.319 --> 03:09:13.159
and yeah, I want to say
you guys do appreciate you. Thanks so

2470
03:09:13.239 --> 03:09:16.040
much. Good a live menix is
love it Debates, Please step in more.

2471
03:09:16.360 --> 03:09:20.200
Jake wisconstantly Okay, let's see Moel. Thanks for coming by, so

2472
03:09:20.440 --> 03:09:24.239
free and free. Thanks for coming
by, seither, John Ve glad to

2473
03:09:24.239 --> 03:09:26.200
have you with us. Golden Victory
Lighthouse, thanks for coming by. Debate

2474
03:09:26.280 --> 03:09:30.920
already wrapped up, just so you
know, Thanks so much. Davidson Trailer.

2475
03:09:31.159 --> 03:09:33.120
Happy to have you here, Houston. You are good to have you.

2476
03:09:33.479 --> 03:09:35.319
And I want to say, though, thank you guys for all your

2477
03:09:35.319 --> 03:09:39.120
support. Hawaiian cc it says feet
picks, I'm working on it. Check

2478
03:09:39.159 --> 03:09:41.840
your email. Thanks for coming by. I want to say, love you

2479
03:09:41.879 --> 03:09:45.200
guys, Thanks for all your support. Join us while we were small.

2480
03:09:45.440 --> 03:09:50.280
This is modern day debates, early
stages. Believe me, join us while

2481
03:09:50.280 --> 03:09:54.719
we are young. Our story is
just beginning. Modern a Debate is going

2482
03:09:54.760 --> 03:09:58.000
to do huge things in the coming
years, and someday we're gonna look back

2483
03:09:58.000 --> 03:10:01.319
and say, wow, you remember
you're so small. We had one hundred

2484
03:10:01.360 --> 03:10:03.520
and seventy seven thousand subs. That's
how big we're going to be. In

2485
03:10:03.559 --> 03:10:07.120
the future, we're going to host
bigger and badder debates, more epic debates,

2486
03:10:07.159 --> 03:10:11.479
things that are going to knock your
socks off. Believe me, they're

2487
03:10:11.479 --> 03:10:16.239
going to be tremendous. People will
be saying, Wow, I can't believe

2488
03:10:16.280 --> 03:10:18.520
modern a debate. How they pull
that. That's amazing. We're excited.

2489
03:10:18.520 --> 03:10:26.440
We are continually improving ourselves, continually
developing things, improving, tinkering, learning

2490
03:10:26.760 --> 03:10:30.200
and figuring out how we can improve
more and more. And want to say

2491
03:10:30.200 --> 03:10:33.200
thank you guys so much for all
of your support. We're excited about the

2492
03:10:33.200 --> 03:10:37.559
future as we strive provide a neutral
platform so that everybody can make their case

2493
03:10:37.680 --> 03:10:41.319
on a level playing field. We
believe that's important, and we know you

2494
03:10:41.399 --> 03:10:46.680
believe that's important. We believe in
letting a thousand flowers bloom, letting the

2495
03:10:46.760 --> 03:10:50.000
chips fall where they may, giving
people a chance to make their case on

2496
03:10:50.040 --> 03:10:52.879
a level playing field. So I
want to say thanks for all your support.

2497
03:10:54.040 --> 03:10:56.319
I love you guys. Keep sifting
out the reasonable from the unreasonable,

2498
03:10:56.399 --> 03:10:58.280
and we will see you at the
next debate.