1
00:00:02,799 --> 00:00:07,599
Speaker 1: Welcome, Welcome, welcome. You're listening to Jay's analysis, and we

2
00:00:07,679 --> 00:00:12,199
are going live. Gonna let the audience trickle in here

3
00:00:12,240 --> 00:00:15,640
a little bit, see if we can build up a

4
00:00:15,720 --> 00:00:22,480
little bit of watch your viewership listenership. Excuse me before

5
00:00:22,600 --> 00:00:31,719
we actually get going with the debate, before I send him, No,

6
00:00:31,839 --> 00:00:35,039
we're not late. I'm just I'm on the road, so

7
00:00:35,119 --> 00:00:36,920
I'm at a bit of a disadvantage. I don't have

8
00:00:37,039 --> 00:00:45,560
my library with me, and I'm not really familiar with

9
00:00:46,560 --> 00:00:50,679
mister fun doctor Feeld. Actually he we have mutual friends.

10
00:00:51,000 --> 00:00:54,600
I've been friends with some guys for about a decade

11
00:00:54,640 --> 00:00:58,560
that set this up, and I'm glad to do this

12
00:00:58,719 --> 00:01:01,119
because it's been so long since I've done it, real

13
00:01:03,200 --> 00:01:06,239
debate with a trained person and these kinds of ideas.

14
00:01:07,519 --> 00:01:11,840
You know, we get the internet philosophers, but we don't

15
00:01:11,920 --> 00:01:19,319
often get trained academic types. So I'm going to send

16
00:01:19,439 --> 00:01:23,480
him the link now, and I'm gonna be going from

17
00:01:23,840 --> 00:01:26,400
memory here. I've got some of my articles pulled up

18
00:01:27,079 --> 00:01:28,519
because I'm on the road, but I didn't want to

19
00:01:28,560 --> 00:01:32,200
say no to this debate, and if need be, we

20
00:01:32,280 --> 00:01:38,319
may down the road have successive debates that deal with

21
00:01:38,640 --> 00:01:41,480
you know, maybe questions that get raised in this debate. Right, So,

22
00:01:41,599 --> 00:01:43,239
since I'm on the road, I don't have my sumo

23
00:01:43,319 --> 00:01:46,599
with me, I don't have the Sumo countries and TLAs,

24
00:01:46,760 --> 00:01:50,879
I don't have my thmistic commentaries. I'm going to be

25
00:01:50,920 --> 00:01:53,640
going from memory. And but again, it's not that hard

26
00:01:53,680 --> 00:01:57,159
to know what Thomas's doctrin of divine simplicity is. It's

27
00:01:57,200 --> 00:02:01,439
pretty clearly stated multiple times in Volume one of the

28
00:02:01,519 --> 00:02:04,599
sum and in Volume one of the Super Countridge and

29
00:02:04,680 --> 00:02:09,319
Tea Lace. So I've sent him the link, so he

30
00:02:09,360 --> 00:02:12,960
should be coming in pretty soon, and I imagine it

31
00:02:12,960 --> 00:02:18,800
will be a pretty pretty laid back debate. Doctor fine Gold,

32
00:02:18,800 --> 00:02:27,000
How are you good? How are you? Mister Dyer? You jay? Okay?

33
00:02:27,000 --> 00:02:29,919
That's cool. Thanks for doing the debate, man, how are you?

34
00:02:30,759 --> 00:02:31,400
I'm doing all right.

35
00:02:31,439 --> 00:02:32,879
Speaker 2: Thank you for having me on. It's an honor.

36
00:02:34,520 --> 00:02:37,879
Speaker 1: Yeah. I appreciate justin putting it together. I know he

37
00:02:37,919 --> 00:02:39,840
was kind of looking for somebody to do a debate

38
00:02:39,879 --> 00:02:42,159
for a while, and I think you would be a

39
00:02:42,240 --> 00:02:47,479
perfect category or a perfect person for this category. You

40
00:02:47,479 --> 00:02:49,039
you want to tell us a little bit about yourself

41
00:02:49,039 --> 00:02:51,400
and your research, and that you I think you did

42
00:02:51,439 --> 00:02:54,080
your dissertation on Thomas right, sure, yeah.

43
00:02:54,120 --> 00:02:59,080
Speaker 2: So my dissertation, which I defined it last November, was

44
00:02:59,080 --> 00:03:02,599
on divine impass ability in aquitness, so specifically trying to

45
00:03:02,599 --> 00:03:06,439
deal with the problem of how to reconcile standard to

46
00:03:06,439 --> 00:03:13,120
missing doctrines like pure actuality and divine simplicity with the

47
00:03:13,159 --> 00:03:16,039
dependence of the love of the love around the beloved,

48
00:03:17,039 --> 00:03:20,560
which seems to imply passibility. And are you still there?

49
00:03:20,599 --> 00:03:23,280
Speaker 1: Because yeah, you know, you might want to cut your

50
00:03:23,639 --> 00:03:26,280
camera off because it's good, it'll use a lot of bandwidth,

51
00:03:26,280 --> 00:03:28,199
and we might want to audio.

52
00:03:29,439 --> 00:03:30,919
Speaker 2: Let's see if I can figure out how to do that.

53
00:03:31,000 --> 00:03:35,080
Speaker 1: There we go, Yeah, yeah, that'll probably be a little smoother.

54
00:03:35,240 --> 00:03:38,840
Now sounds good. And I want to add two to

55
00:03:38,919 --> 00:03:41,879
the audience that we will will be taking we are

56
00:03:41,879 --> 00:03:45,520
you cool taking questions? Of course? Okay, so people in

57
00:03:45,520 --> 00:03:48,080
the audience, if you want to do super chat questions,

58
00:03:48,080 --> 00:03:51,159
will take those. As usual, I always split the super

59
00:03:51,280 --> 00:03:54,479
chats with the guests, so doctor fine Gold will get

60
00:03:54,520 --> 00:03:56,639
half of the super chat questions that you guys ask,

61
00:03:57,039 --> 00:03:59,280
So come up with some good ones. As we discuss here,

62
00:03:59,319 --> 00:04:02,919
I'm thinking maybe we could do a pretty free flowing

63
00:04:03,080 --> 00:04:06,199
conversation style doesn't have to be formal debate, mainly because

64
00:04:06,840 --> 00:04:08,840
I'm not at my library, so I'm on the road

65
00:04:08,879 --> 00:04:10,759
and I'm kind of going from memory. You have the

66
00:04:10,759 --> 00:04:14,680
home court advantage all sort of. I just have my laptops.

67
00:04:14,919 --> 00:04:18,680
But okay, well that's fine, so I'll do you How

68
00:04:18,720 --> 00:04:21,680
do we want to start this off? Do you want to? Uh,

69
00:04:23,079 --> 00:04:25,120
let me ask you? Are you are you very familiar

70
00:04:25,240 --> 00:04:27,600
with Eastern theology or like the Eastern.

71
00:04:27,920 --> 00:04:30,040
Speaker 2: Now I can't claim a lot of familiarity. I have

72
00:04:30,079 --> 00:04:33,000
a couple of paragraphs on Pollens and my dissertation, but

73
00:04:33,040 --> 00:04:36,639
that's about it. So if you want to, maybe it

74
00:04:36,680 --> 00:04:38,399
would be good to do something like this where you

75
00:04:38,439 --> 00:04:42,240
give the basic polem my position, which I take it

76
00:04:42,279 --> 00:04:46,959
you'll be defending. I'll give the basic elevator pitch for aquitness,

77
00:04:46,959 --> 00:04:48,279
and then we can start probing.

78
00:04:49,319 --> 00:04:53,680
Speaker 1: Sure, so I'll start off by saying that the Palamite

79
00:04:53,720 --> 00:04:58,720
position actually isn't the the position just of San Palamas.

80
00:04:58,759 --> 00:05:02,040
In fact, it's a doctrine that I would say pretty

81
00:05:02,040 --> 00:05:05,040
clearly as taught in Saint Bezols letter two thirty four,

82
00:05:05,120 --> 00:05:08,480
where he exp makes the distinction between the essence and energy,

83
00:05:09,600 --> 00:05:12,480
or the essence and the operations of God. If we

84
00:05:12,519 --> 00:05:17,000
look at Saint John Damascus's Orthodox Faith in multiple times

85
00:05:17,000 --> 00:05:20,079
throughout the work he makes the distinction between the essence

86
00:05:20,120 --> 00:05:22,800
and energy of God. Of course, in book one he

87
00:05:22,879 --> 00:05:26,120
will say that the energy of God is one, and

88
00:05:26,120 --> 00:05:27,600
then he goes on to say that the energy of

89
00:05:27,600 --> 00:05:30,680
God is also multiple. For us, that's a one in

90
00:05:30,720 --> 00:05:33,120
the many questions where we don't actually see a dialectic,

91
00:05:33,160 --> 00:05:36,240
but in fact the energies of God are or actions

92
00:05:36,240 --> 00:05:39,759
of God are multiple. And later on on the Orthodox

93
00:05:39,800 --> 00:05:44,720
Faith he even clarifies this in a more intense way

94
00:05:44,879 --> 00:05:47,800
when he talks about the energies in Christ and the Incarnation,

95
00:05:49,800 --> 00:05:54,639
specifically the relationship between the two natural wills and operations

96
00:05:54,720 --> 00:05:58,120
or energies in the two natures. This, of course is

97
00:05:58,199 --> 00:06:03,279
because the six that Conical Council dealt extensively with debating

98
00:06:03,319 --> 00:06:06,560
the Mono Thelites on the question of Christ and the

99
00:06:06,560 --> 00:06:10,720
Incarnation having two wills and two energy's property to the

100
00:06:10,759 --> 00:06:13,759
proper to those natures. So I would argue, as Saint

101
00:06:13,759 --> 00:06:17,439
Gregory Palamas does against Barlam, and as Saint Gregor sat

102
00:06:17,519 --> 00:06:23,000
Maximus the Confessor did against against Paris the Mono Thelite,

103
00:06:23,120 --> 00:06:28,639
that the nature grace question and the question of the

104
00:06:28,759 --> 00:06:32,680
essence and energies distinction in the incarnation is even clearer

105
00:06:32,720 --> 00:06:35,519
when we understand that there's no dialectics. So there's no

106
00:06:35,600 --> 00:06:38,759
dialectics in the relationship between nature and grace. There's no

107
00:06:38,839 --> 00:06:43,720
dialectics between the relationship of Christ's human nature and energy

108
00:06:44,000 --> 00:06:46,959
participating in the divine nature and energy. So, in other words,

109
00:06:46,959 --> 00:06:50,279
the uncreated energies of God. It's not just a question

110
00:06:50,319 --> 00:06:54,759
of God's relationship to creation, but it's also solidified dogmatically

111
00:06:54,839 --> 00:06:58,920
and theologically in the sixth Ecumenical Council when it deals

112
00:06:58,959 --> 00:07:02,480
with this specific question. If you read the debate between

113
00:07:02,639 --> 00:07:05,920
Saint Maximus and Puris, you'll see that Maximus relies throughout

114
00:07:06,279 --> 00:07:10,360
in that one hundred and fifty page treatise on this

115
00:07:10,439 --> 00:07:14,120
being a real distinction. This real distinction allows for God

116
00:07:14,160 --> 00:07:17,279
to remain transcend it in his essence and yet come

117
00:07:17,360 --> 00:07:20,519
down to us and allow us to participate in his

118
00:07:20,680 --> 00:07:24,399
uncreated glory and life. Jesus says in John seventeen that

119
00:07:24,720 --> 00:07:27,079
he came to give us the same glory that he

120
00:07:27,160 --> 00:07:29,800
shares with the Father from all eternity. That glory that

121
00:07:29,920 --> 00:07:33,000
light is not created, is in fact uncreated, and it's

122
00:07:33,040 --> 00:07:36,319
not something that just is postponed to an intellectual vision

123
00:07:36,920 --> 00:07:39,319
in the afterlife to be a tipic vision. And in fact,

124
00:07:39,360 --> 00:07:42,279
it is something that's participated in here and now, and

125
00:07:42,319 --> 00:07:45,240
we know that by the fact of the incarnation. In fact,

126
00:07:45,279 --> 00:07:48,120
when the Fathers at the six Ecumenical Council and at

127
00:07:48,160 --> 00:07:51,199
the fifth by the way, talk about the incarnation, they

128
00:07:51,199 --> 00:07:54,800
speak of the humanity of Christ as being deified via

129
00:07:54,839 --> 00:07:59,120
the incarnation. Again, this process is done by the uncreated

130
00:07:59,279 --> 00:08:04,240
energies which proceed from the divine nature, certainly, although they're

131
00:08:04,279 --> 00:08:06,319
not the exact same as the divine nature. In our view,

132
00:08:06,839 --> 00:08:09,439
that is the that is the means by which the

133
00:08:09,560 --> 00:08:13,920
humanity of Christ participates in the divine life. That's explicitly

134
00:08:13,959 --> 00:08:17,279
stated quoting from Saint Gregor Nissa and Saint Gregor of

135
00:08:17,360 --> 00:08:20,639
Nazianzus and the theological orations at the fifth and sixth Council.

136
00:08:20,680 --> 00:08:24,199
So it's repeated, it's reaffirmed. We also have statements at

137
00:08:24,199 --> 00:08:28,279
the Council of Ephesus citing Saint Cyril of Alexandria Gisnastoria,

138
00:08:28,360 --> 00:08:32,039
so that the bread and wine in a similar way,

139
00:08:32,120 --> 00:08:35,759
participate in these divine energies. There are multiple references to

140
00:08:35,840 --> 00:08:38,919
these same ideas in the Liturgies of the East, all

141
00:08:38,960 --> 00:08:42,320
which talk about the operations of God. The baptismal right,

142
00:08:42,399 --> 00:08:45,000
for example, talks about calling down the energies of God

143
00:08:45,039 --> 00:08:48,080
into the baptismal font. And again it's all just based

144
00:08:48,120 --> 00:08:53,279
on our crystological understanding, which we see as again dogmatically

145
00:08:53,320 --> 00:08:56,559
stating in the sixth and fifth Council, that the energies

146
00:08:56,600 --> 00:09:01,320
deify the humanity. So that model of deification of Christ's

147
00:09:01,360 --> 00:09:05,639
humanity is the model for the individual believer, the individual

148
00:09:05,679 --> 00:09:09,559
baptized Christian, as they participate in God through the Church,

149
00:09:09,600 --> 00:09:13,320
through the sacraments, and that that participation is a real participation,

150
00:09:13,919 --> 00:09:18,000
but it's a participation in the uncreated glory, an uncreated light,

151
00:09:18,320 --> 00:09:21,960
uncreated grace of God, not a created grace. So I

152
00:09:21,960 --> 00:09:27,120
would contrast this with what's later dogmatized, so not just

153
00:09:27,320 --> 00:09:32,320
theoretically or philosophically speculated upon an aquinas in terms of

154
00:09:33,039 --> 00:09:36,000
how there might be a relationship between this absolutely simple

155
00:09:36,080 --> 00:09:41,240
essence and created beings, or this absolutely simple essence and

156
00:09:41,440 --> 00:09:46,519
the one person of the Trinity somehow becoming incarnate. Rather,

157
00:09:47,200 --> 00:09:50,200
it is the question of the Roman dogmas, and the

158
00:09:50,279 --> 00:09:53,799
Roman dogmas do eventually state. And I think I'm vindicating

159
00:09:53,840 --> 00:09:56,759
this by this, not just in my reading of what's

160
00:09:56,799 --> 00:10:00,320
that the Roman Council's, particularly like Tranth or Vatican One,

161
00:10:00,960 --> 00:10:05,240
where dogmatic divide simplicity has stated pretty clearly, you also

162
00:10:05,279 --> 00:10:07,639
have the outworkings of this in terms of created grace.

163
00:10:07,720 --> 00:10:10,679
You know, Trent has, if I recall, going from memory,

164
00:10:11,080 --> 00:10:15,720
a condemnation of different speculations about what kind of grace

165
00:10:15,759 --> 00:10:18,759
and justification is actually given in baptism, and one of

166
00:10:18,799 --> 00:10:22,000
the things that's condemned is the idea that it's not

167
00:10:22,720 --> 00:10:26,480
created grace. So, in other words, the grace that is

168
00:10:26,480 --> 00:10:30,639
stamped upon our soul, the sanctifying grace, is a created effect.

169
00:10:31,200 --> 00:10:32,919
And of course this is again in that sort of

170
00:10:32,960 --> 00:10:36,480
riscituentan causal format of God the cause, and then we

171
00:10:36,519 --> 00:10:40,360
receive the effects of that cause. But the effects that

172
00:10:40,399 --> 00:10:43,480
we receive are in fact created. And I would argue

173
00:10:43,519 --> 00:10:47,320
that the reason that Rome has this issue is precisely

174
00:10:47,399 --> 00:10:53,000
because eventually in the dogma, the uncreated created or excuse me,

175
00:10:53,039 --> 00:10:56,399
the uncreated grace, as his energy to sanctioned doctrine was

176
00:10:56,440 --> 00:11:01,440
eventually lost, so it was perfectly fine in terms of

177
00:11:01,519 --> 00:11:04,679
up into the sixth seventh eighth Council, if you count

178
00:11:04,720 --> 00:11:08,120
the eighth r eighth that is where it was stated explicitly.

179
00:11:08,399 --> 00:11:10,759
But it eventually, i would say, after the rise of

180
00:11:10,960 --> 00:11:15,799
Frankish dominance, Charlemagne, the Carolinians, you eventually have this dogma

181
00:11:15,960 --> 00:11:19,039
kind of being lost and forgotten. In Roman Catholic theology

182
00:11:19,200 --> 00:11:23,919
pretty much settles into a pretty ossified, solidified doctrine of

183
00:11:23,919 --> 00:11:28,720
what divine simplicity is. So there are a lot of errors.

184
00:11:28,759 --> 00:11:31,120
I'm going to close up here with this opening statement.

185
00:11:31,200 --> 00:11:33,960
I think that's the main the main point we would

186
00:11:34,000 --> 00:11:35,840
say that there's a lot of errors that kind of

187
00:11:36,200 --> 00:11:39,279
flow out of this that you can tease out. And

188
00:11:39,360 --> 00:11:43,840
so my first clarification is that I'm not debating whether

189
00:11:43,960 --> 00:11:47,960
Thomas had good intentions. I'm not debating whether Thomas in

190
00:11:48,039 --> 00:11:52,200
other places in the Suma said things correctly. I'm not

191
00:11:52,279 --> 00:11:55,720
here to debate Agustin's intentions or and some's intentions, but

192
00:11:55,799 --> 00:11:59,279
rather just specifically whether or not the things that are stated,

193
00:11:59,360 --> 00:12:02,279
say in book one of Syma Theologica and in book

194
00:12:02,320 --> 00:12:06,399
one of the Semlicuntries and Telaes about what divine simplicity

195
00:12:06,559 --> 00:12:09,799
is if that actually makes sense with and comports with

196
00:12:09,879 --> 00:12:13,600
what is stated elsewhere about how there is a real

197
00:12:13,639 --> 00:12:16,519
distinction of persons, because to us it doesn't seem that

198
00:12:16,559 --> 00:12:20,720
there could be a real distinction of persons if distinction

199
00:12:20,840 --> 00:12:24,759
implies composition or division. In fact, that's a direct borrowing

200
00:12:24,799 --> 00:12:28,919
from Plutonis, as Plutonis who first said will, following other

201
00:12:28,919 --> 00:12:34,879
Greek philosophers before him, that all consideration of distinction implies

202
00:12:34,960 --> 00:12:38,039
division or composition. And for us we see that as

203
00:12:38,320 --> 00:12:41,799
many times refuted, particularly in the christological heresies, but also

204
00:12:41,879 --> 00:12:46,120
in the triological triantological formations of the early Church. So

205
00:12:46,159 --> 00:12:49,600
for us, all of these questions are linked the doctrine

206
00:12:49,639 --> 00:12:52,799
of God how he relates to creation, also the doctrine

207
00:12:52,840 --> 00:12:57,080
of Christology, the doctrine of the sacraments, and the doctrine

208
00:12:57,120 --> 00:13:01,879
of eschatology, or all intimately connect an ecclesiology in terms

209
00:13:01,879 --> 00:13:04,200
of how we view the essence introducedinction and whether we

210
00:13:04,240 --> 00:13:07,519
believe that it's possible or not. So when it comes

211
00:13:07,559 --> 00:13:11,840
to Aquinas's conclusions, I'll say that for my later critique,

212
00:13:12,559 --> 00:13:14,840
given the fact that, for example, I don't see how

213
00:13:15,000 --> 00:13:18,080
creation can be a free action of God if we

214
00:13:18,159 --> 00:13:21,440
accept his doctrine of device simplicity, and the idea that

215
00:13:21,480 --> 00:13:25,480
all the actions of God are absolutely isomorphically identical to

216
00:13:25,559 --> 00:13:28,039
the essence of God. I don't see how we can

217
00:13:28,080 --> 00:13:31,200
say that there's a real incarnation if God is an

218
00:13:31,240 --> 00:13:34,559
absolutely simple essence, or for example, how we would avoid

219
00:13:34,639 --> 00:13:38,519
patropascianism if God is an absolutely simple essence. In other words,

220
00:13:38,519 --> 00:13:42,639
that one hypostasis of the trinity couldn't enter into a

221
00:13:42,720 --> 00:13:45,759
motive being that the others do not. So, for example,

222
00:13:45,759 --> 00:13:48,679
the Father is not crucified, the Father does not become incarnate,

223
00:13:49,200 --> 00:13:52,159
it's only the Son. But if God is an absolutely

224
00:13:52,200 --> 00:13:57,279
simple essence in which the distinctions implied composition of division,

225
00:13:57,639 --> 00:14:00,360
becomes difficult to see how there is a real nation,

226
00:14:00,519 --> 00:14:04,840
how God's actions within time and space are real actions

227
00:14:05,399 --> 00:14:08,519
signifying the divine power for as For example, it's common

228
00:14:08,519 --> 00:14:11,480
amount to the early Fathers to speak of Christ's human

229
00:14:11,600 --> 00:14:14,759
nature being evident when he cries or when he eats,

230
00:14:15,360 --> 00:14:18,200
But we see the Fathers also making a strong argument

231
00:14:18,279 --> 00:14:22,240
for the divine power operat in Christ or through Christ.

232
00:14:22,440 --> 00:14:25,360
When he walks on water, when he does miracles, when

233
00:14:25,360 --> 00:14:27,720
he raises the dead, those are actions proper to the

234
00:14:27,720 --> 00:14:31,679
divine nature, and they are real powers entering into time

235
00:14:31,679 --> 00:14:34,919
and space from the divine nature itself. Now we don't

236
00:14:34,919 --> 00:14:37,720
believe the divine nature interers into time and space, but

237
00:14:37,799 --> 00:14:41,320
in fact that is possible for the uncreated to enter

238
00:14:41,320 --> 00:14:43,799
into time and space because of our belief in the

239
00:14:44,360 --> 00:14:47,919
essence introduced sanction. And I'll close with I would say

240
00:14:47,960 --> 00:14:50,840
our strongest case in that regard is the fact that

241
00:14:50,919 --> 00:14:54,720
for us, the theophanies of the Old Testament up until

242
00:14:54,720 --> 00:14:56,720
Augustine in book three of On the Trinity is when

243
00:14:56,759 --> 00:15:02,519
it's first question. The Eastern Fathers never questioned the belief

244
00:15:02,600 --> 00:15:06,559
that it is not created holograms or angels that are present,

245
00:15:06,559 --> 00:15:08,840
for example in Exodus three in the Burning Bush, or

246
00:15:09,000 --> 00:15:11,000
in Exodus twenty three where God says I will put

247
00:15:11,080 --> 00:15:13,639
my name in my Angel, the Angel of the Lord.

248
00:15:14,159 --> 00:15:17,480
It is consistently believed that these theophanies are the pre

249
00:15:17,559 --> 00:15:23,360
incarnate presence of Christ himself. Tomism and Augustinian debates and

250
00:15:23,399 --> 00:15:26,639
discussions and on the Trinity and questioning of this led

251
00:15:26,679 --> 00:15:29,960
to the possibility that or led to the conclusion that

252
00:15:30,000 --> 00:15:33,639
it's difficult to see how an absolutely simple Trinitarian essence

253
00:15:33,679 --> 00:15:36,279
could manifest within time and space. Therefore, we have to

254
00:15:36,360 --> 00:15:40,720
accept that these are just angelic created forms. We don't

255
00:15:40,759 --> 00:15:42,879
believe that their Angela created forms, and neither do the

256
00:15:42,960 --> 00:15:45,720
church fathers who argue that these are these are this

257
00:15:45,840 --> 00:15:48,440
is the Logos manifesting within time and space. How is

258
00:15:48,480 --> 00:15:51,360
that possible? It's possible because of the essence energy distinction.

259
00:15:52,519 --> 00:15:55,159
So I will close with that and as my opening

260
00:15:55,240 --> 00:15:57,159
statement and let you let you speak.

261
00:15:58,440 --> 00:16:01,480
Speaker 2: All right, Well, there's I had a bit there obviously,

262
00:16:02,559 --> 00:16:06,000
so maybe leaving something out, but it sounds as though

263
00:16:06,000 --> 00:16:10,200
we've got maybe five or six areas. You're powered right,

264
00:16:10,240 --> 00:16:12,039
So you've got I don't I don't know if you

265
00:16:12,039 --> 00:16:13,919
talked about this one explicitly, but you've got the distinction

266
00:16:13,960 --> 00:16:17,679
of attributes within God. You're going to have the problem

267
00:16:18,000 --> 00:16:20,559
of God's actions of respect to the world. You've got

268
00:16:20,559 --> 00:16:22,720
the problem of the trinity. You've got the problem of

269
00:16:22,720 --> 00:16:27,480
the hypostatic union and the communication of idioms. And you

270
00:16:27,519 --> 00:16:30,559
have the problem of nature and grace and what it

271
00:16:30,600 --> 00:16:33,320
means to say that we share in God's life. And

272
00:16:33,360 --> 00:16:35,840
I'm not all these are the same problem. So we

273
00:16:35,879 --> 00:16:39,919
should probably take those piece by piece, and I'll try

274
00:16:39,919 --> 00:16:45,000
to get to that in a minute. Since you did

275
00:16:45,000 --> 00:16:47,480
a little thing saying what you were clarifying is what

276
00:16:47,519 --> 00:16:49,360
you're trying to do and what you're not trying to do,

277
00:16:49,440 --> 00:16:51,559
I'll do a little bit of the same. So I'm

278
00:16:51,639 --> 00:16:55,399
not a theologian by trade, and my job. The thing

279
00:16:55,440 --> 00:16:58,720
what I'm trying to do here isn't primarily to make

280
00:16:58,799 --> 00:17:01,840
sense of council document so are the fathers. What I'm

281
00:17:01,840 --> 00:17:04,640
trying to do is to make sense of the coherence

282
00:17:04,920 --> 00:17:08,359
of Aquanus's doctrine of divine simplicity as best as I

283
00:17:08,400 --> 00:17:11,480
understand it, and I've messed around with the Trinity some

284
00:17:11,799 --> 00:17:14,000
I'm not an expert on the aquinus A theory of

285
00:17:14,039 --> 00:17:16,359
the hypostatic union, so what I'll be saying about that

286
00:17:16,400 --> 00:17:18,799
will be mostly guesswork, So I'm just throwing that out

287
00:17:18,799 --> 00:17:20,079
as Covey ads here.

288
00:17:21,160 --> 00:17:22,160
Speaker 1: But yeah, and what.

289
00:17:22,160 --> 00:17:25,119
Speaker 2: You said about impuning motivations, I thoroughly agree with that.

290
00:17:25,160 --> 00:17:28,319
I think we're both here to try to safeguard God's

291
00:17:28,440 --> 00:17:35,599
transcendence and try unity as best as we can. So

292
00:17:37,319 --> 00:17:40,160
let me start my elevator pitch, which I'll try to

293
00:17:40,200 --> 00:17:44,519
keep fairly short, just by explaining why somebody like Aquinas

294
00:17:44,640 --> 00:17:48,440
would find the doction of divine simplicity appealing, and then

295
00:17:48,839 --> 00:17:51,440
we can go over how in the context of that

296
00:17:51,480 --> 00:17:53,119
doctrine you try to make sense of the other things

297
00:17:53,119 --> 00:17:54,400
that you talked about. Does that sound good?

298
00:17:54,839 --> 00:17:55,960
Speaker 1: Sure? Okay?

299
00:17:56,400 --> 00:18:02,960
Speaker 2: So the basic reason for affirming divine simplicity it comes

300
00:18:03,000 --> 00:18:08,119
from affirming the philosophical and obviously a theological a doction

301
00:18:08,240 --> 00:18:10,640
of the first cause. What does it mean to say

302
00:18:10,720 --> 00:18:16,559
that there is a being who is absolutely first? What

303
00:18:16,559 --> 00:18:18,440
does it mean to say that there is a being which,

304
00:18:18,599 --> 00:18:22,559
unlike any being that we know of, it does not

305
00:18:22,640 --> 00:18:27,119
need a further explanation behind itself. So all Aquinas is

306
00:18:27,160 --> 00:18:30,319
famous proofs for God's existence, and this goes for Aristotle

307
00:18:30,400 --> 00:18:38,559
as well. Are going to argue from our experience in

308
00:18:38,599 --> 00:18:43,119
the created world of things which are a certain way

309
00:18:43,160 --> 00:18:47,519
that didn't have to be, and arguing from that to

310
00:18:47,880 --> 00:18:51,200
a cause which you might say, not to use aquitas

311
00:18:51,279 --> 00:18:55,720
own terms, but something which is the sufficient reason of

312
00:18:55,759 --> 00:18:57,759
its own being that way.

313
00:18:57,880 --> 00:18:58,279
Speaker 1: Right, So the.

314
00:18:58,359 --> 00:19:01,119
Speaker 2: Argument for emotion. We see things that change, we see

315
00:19:01,119 --> 00:19:05,039
things that move. What does that mean? That means we

316
00:19:05,119 --> 00:19:10,160
see something which was in potency becomes actualized and we

317
00:19:10,200 --> 00:19:12,440
want to figure out what on earth did it do

318
00:19:12,559 --> 00:19:16,400
that what's responsible for it's going from potency into act

319
00:19:16,799 --> 00:19:20,319
And you can say there was something else that actualized that.

320
00:19:20,319 --> 00:19:21,680
That's fine, but then you've got to ask the same

321
00:19:21,759 --> 00:19:25,119
question about it. Does it have an actualized potency? If so,

322
00:19:25,240 --> 00:19:27,039
what made that one actualize? And so you're going to

323
00:19:27,119 --> 00:19:30,759
keep on chasing that ball until you come up with

324
00:19:30,799 --> 00:19:34,720
something which has no potency but just it is pure actuality. Right,

325
00:19:34,720 --> 00:19:38,440
So that's the famous domestic doctrine of Actus Purus. Sure,

326
00:19:38,480 --> 00:19:42,960
I'm sure you're well familiar with and thinks that it's

327
00:19:43,119 --> 00:19:46,039
once you grant the pure act doctrine, in other words,

328
00:19:46,039 --> 00:19:51,640
that there is nothing there's nothing in God whose reality

329
00:19:52,680 --> 00:19:55,000
has to be explained by something outside of itself. There's

330
00:19:55,039 --> 00:19:59,160
nothing in God that could have been otherwise that was

331
00:19:59,200 --> 00:20:02,640
made to be the way is by something that wasn't itself.

332
00:20:03,240 --> 00:20:06,319
Once you grant that, Aquanus thinks that it's a short

333
00:20:06,440 --> 00:20:11,599
step to the doction of absolute simplicity. Because for Aquitas,

334
00:20:12,279 --> 00:20:16,960
whenever you have parts, where you're going to have is

335
00:20:17,039 --> 00:20:20,480
some sort of potency act relationship. Right, So when you

336
00:20:20,559 --> 00:20:23,839
have talking there are different kinds of parts. I'm not

337
00:20:23,839 --> 00:20:27,519
sure how familiar you are with Aquinas's myriology with the

338
00:20:27,559 --> 00:20:30,759
study of parts and holes. Right, So the most obvious

339
00:20:30,839 --> 00:20:33,079
kind of parts is going to be integral parts.

340
00:20:33,119 --> 00:20:33,279
Speaker 1: Right.

341
00:20:33,279 --> 00:20:34,839
Speaker 2: So like the bricks that make up a house.

342
00:20:35,359 --> 00:20:35,480
Speaker 1: Right.

343
00:20:35,559 --> 00:20:37,240
Speaker 2: So in the case of the bricks that make up

344
00:20:37,279 --> 00:20:42,039
a house, you've got actual, actually some mutual dependence relations going, right,

345
00:20:42,119 --> 00:20:45,720
because the house wouldn't be a house unless it was

346
00:20:46,400 --> 00:20:50,440
built up out of these parts. Right, So there's dependence there.

347
00:20:50,599 --> 00:20:54,640
But likewise, these bricks only actually count as what they

348
00:20:54,680 --> 00:20:57,119
are in the parts of the house because of their

349
00:20:57,160 --> 00:21:00,559
dependence on the whole. Right, yourselves are humans because they're

350
00:21:00,559 --> 00:21:03,759
part of your human body. And so with regular integral

351
00:21:03,799 --> 00:21:07,960
or quantitative parts as they're sometimes called, you're not going

352
00:21:08,519 --> 00:21:10,799
you don't want to predicate those of God, because then

353
00:21:10,880 --> 00:21:14,599
you'd be introducing potency into what by definition can't have it.

354
00:21:14,680 --> 00:21:16,759
If it did have it, then you'd have to ask

355
00:21:17,000 --> 00:21:19,119
what actualized the potency, and you want to have reached

356
00:21:19,279 --> 00:21:23,079
the actual first cause yet, So that's for integral parts.

357
00:21:24,599 --> 00:21:27,240
Usually what people are worried about, when at least people

358
00:21:27,240 --> 00:21:30,359
who grant that God's immaterial, what they're worried about when

359
00:21:31,480 --> 00:21:35,400
they object to divine simplicity isn't integral parts. It's usually

360
00:21:35,440 --> 00:21:39,119
going to be accidents, right, either the kind of accident

361
00:21:39,160 --> 00:21:41,920
which ionus would call extraneous accidents, which in us would

362
00:21:41,920 --> 00:21:45,119
be things like color and shape and size and all

363
00:21:45,119 --> 00:21:48,880
that stuff, or proper accidents, which for us would be

364
00:21:48,960 --> 00:21:51,240
things like the powers of our soul, things which we

365
00:21:51,680 --> 00:21:55,160
can't help about having given our nature. So why can't

366
00:21:55,200 --> 00:22:00,720
there be a multiplicity in God of those aquitness is

367
00:22:00,880 --> 00:22:05,079
basic answer here. It's going to be, well, anytime that

368
00:22:05,119 --> 00:22:08,759
you have a So there's a couple of different lines

369
00:22:08,759 --> 00:22:09,200
of argument.

370
00:22:09,200 --> 00:22:09,759
Speaker 1: Here's why.

371
00:22:10,359 --> 00:22:15,759
Speaker 2: Anytime that you have a subject and a feature of

372
00:22:15,799 --> 00:22:19,680
that subject, and so there's me, and there's my color

373
00:22:21,720 --> 00:22:26,200
that feature that accident makes the subject be in a

374
00:22:26,240 --> 00:22:29,319
certain way. In other words, me. It's just as a

375
00:22:29,359 --> 00:22:31,119
human being, I can be all sorts of different colors.

376
00:22:31,160 --> 00:22:34,839
I've got potency. And what the accident does is it

377
00:22:34,880 --> 00:22:39,279
actualizes that potency in a certain way, makes me be actually.

378
00:22:39,119 --> 00:22:40,079
Speaker 1: Tan or whatever.

379
00:22:40,799 --> 00:22:43,759
Speaker 2: And that would imply that what it does imply that

380
00:22:43,839 --> 00:22:49,200
what's being actualized is of itself potential. And so we

381
00:22:49,240 --> 00:22:54,480
don't want to predicate accidents of certainly of tenness or

382
00:22:54,640 --> 00:22:56,880
color of God, because among other things, he doesn't.

383
00:22:56,640 --> 00:22:57,119
Speaker 1: Have a body.

384
00:22:57,279 --> 00:23:00,440
Speaker 2: We don't want to predicate accidents of Wiz the more

385
00:23:00,640 --> 00:23:04,400
justice of God either, because again, that would be to

386
00:23:04,440 --> 00:23:07,759
imply that what God is the subject of which you're

387
00:23:07,799 --> 00:23:14,240
predicating these accidents lacked that actuality. And so the stimistic

388
00:23:14,279 --> 00:23:16,960
claims that when we say that God is wise, I'm

389
00:23:17,000 --> 00:23:21,559
not saying that there's an extra metaphysical reality which I'm

390
00:23:21,759 --> 00:23:25,319
plugging into the metaphysical reality, which is God. I'm rather

391
00:23:25,400 --> 00:23:28,519
saying that the metaphysical reality, which is God, I can

392
00:23:28,720 --> 00:23:32,200
capture a facet of that if you like, by my

393
00:23:32,279 --> 00:23:38,279
word wise. And so that's one line of argument, and

394
00:23:38,599 --> 00:23:40,400
that argument would be that if you were to say

395
00:23:40,400 --> 00:23:43,680
that God have an accident distinct from himself, then that

396
00:23:43,720 --> 00:23:46,440
would mean that this accident was actualizing God, unless that

397
00:23:46,480 --> 00:23:48,839
God was in potesy, unless that God could not be

398
00:23:49,079 --> 00:23:52,400
really the first cause, and that's wouldn't be God. The

399
00:23:52,440 --> 00:23:56,079
other line of argument would be, I call it the

400
00:23:56,359 --> 00:23:59,039
limiting line of argument. And so the idea would be this,

401
00:23:59,240 --> 00:24:01,079
once you gr and we'd have to do a couple

402
00:24:01,200 --> 00:24:04,480
more steps to show this, but once you grant that

403
00:24:04,599 --> 00:24:08,559
God is the fullness of existence.

404
00:24:08,640 --> 00:24:09,720
Speaker 1: Right, So if you grant.

405
00:24:09,519 --> 00:24:12,680
Speaker 2: The octus purus claim, and you also grant the EEPs

406
00:24:12,680 --> 00:24:14,440
from esse claim, and I can defend that if you like.

407
00:24:15,920 --> 00:24:19,440
Then you're saying that God is this pure fullness of

408
00:24:19,480 --> 00:24:23,279
existence of its itself, and to saying that the pure

409
00:24:23,359 --> 00:24:29,559
fullness of existence itself is something limited, which would be

410
00:24:29,559 --> 00:24:32,200
the case if I were to say that this pure

411
00:24:32,240 --> 00:24:35,880
fullness of existence itself had this little do a hickey

412
00:24:35,960 --> 00:24:38,599
attached to it called wisdom, which was different from it

413
00:24:38,640 --> 00:24:41,559
and different from these other attributes, then I would be saying,

414
00:24:41,640 --> 00:24:45,599
then the infinite and the pure and the what is

415
00:24:45,759 --> 00:24:52,319
pair se through itself is something limited and participated. And

416
00:24:52,400 --> 00:24:53,480
Aquanas thinks.

417
00:24:53,279 --> 00:24:54,359
Speaker 1: That that's.

418
00:24:55,759 --> 00:25:00,119
Speaker 2: Also in flat contradiction to the claim that God is

419
00:25:00,559 --> 00:25:03,200
the first cause in which all other things participate, but

420
00:25:03,279 --> 00:25:06,240
who himself participates in nothing. So I take it those

421
00:25:06,279 --> 00:25:12,079
are the two main lines of arguments against positing accidents

422
00:25:12,839 --> 00:25:16,279
really distinct from God in hearing in him. Now we

423
00:25:16,319 --> 00:25:17,680
would have to do a little bit of work to

424
00:25:17,680 --> 00:25:22,240
pair what you're calling energies with accidents one more thing,

425
00:25:22,279 --> 00:25:25,799
and then we can get into the trying to poke

426
00:25:25,839 --> 00:25:31,200
at the difficulties in each other's positions. So there's you

427
00:25:31,319 --> 00:25:34,559
talked about operations in particular, the word and urgeia obviously

428
00:25:34,640 --> 00:25:37,319
comes from the Greek word, which is most commonly used

429
00:25:37,319 --> 00:25:40,279
for operation. Rislotl uses it that way, although he also

430
00:25:40,359 --> 00:25:43,119
uses it sometimes to talk about form if I'm not mistaken.

431
00:25:45,599 --> 00:25:50,039
And so there's this question of whether these arguments against

432
00:25:51,480 --> 00:25:55,240
divine accidents would also apply to arguments sorry would also

433
00:25:55,279 --> 00:25:59,000
apply to divine actions. Aquinas seems to think that they do.

434
00:25:59,480 --> 00:26:02,759
So he claps actions as a kind of accident, and

435
00:26:02,839 --> 00:26:07,480
so he wants to rule out all actions from God

436
00:26:07,559 --> 00:26:10,240
for the same reason. Then he rules out accident distinct

437
00:26:10,359 --> 00:26:13,119
accidents like justice and wisdom and mercy and stuff like that.

438
00:26:13,839 --> 00:26:15,599
Speaker 1: It's not clear to me, So I'm.

439
00:26:15,480 --> 00:26:17,799
Speaker 2: A bit of a heterodox Stonis. I'm putting my cards

440
00:26:17,799 --> 00:26:20,440
on the table here. It's not clear to me the

441
00:26:20,480 --> 00:26:25,119
actions and formal accidents should actually be considered on the

442
00:26:25,160 --> 00:26:27,880
same plane. I think you can make a principled case

443
00:26:28,960 --> 00:26:34,119
for allowing a real distinction of God's creature directed actions

444
00:26:34,160 --> 00:26:37,799
from himself in a way which you can't make a

445
00:26:37,799 --> 00:26:42,160
good argument for real distinction of his attributes from himself.

446
00:26:42,160 --> 00:26:44,160
And we can get into my crazy theories for why

447
00:26:44,200 --> 00:26:50,480
that's the case later. Okay, So that's my basic argument

448
00:26:50,480 --> 00:26:53,519
for a Quintus's position, as I understand it, should I

449
00:26:53,559 --> 00:26:59,200
try to go through the various theological points that you're

450
00:26:59,200 --> 00:27:00,640
bringing up, or do you want to speak to what

451
00:27:00,640 --> 00:27:01,160
I just said.

452
00:27:03,039 --> 00:27:06,640
Speaker 1: Well, one thing I would say too in response is,

453
00:27:06,680 --> 00:27:10,400
at first, we do affirm that God is simple, every

454
00:27:10,720 --> 00:27:16,559
Orthodox doctrine, every Eastern father and all the fathers Western

455
00:27:16,559 --> 00:27:20,519
fathers as well. Right, consider, we all agree on simplicity.

456
00:27:20,559 --> 00:27:22,000
So it's not really a question of do we teach

457
00:27:22,039 --> 00:27:24,960
divine suplicity, but what in fact do we mean by that?

458
00:27:25,039 --> 00:27:29,519
For us? You know, one of the key theological treatises

459
00:27:29,759 --> 00:27:34,240
is on the Orthodox Faith, and of course Quita specifically

460
00:27:34,279 --> 00:27:39,440
deals with in his treatise on Divine Simplicity. He specifically

461
00:27:39,440 --> 00:27:43,759
deals with questions from John of Damascus right specifically on

462
00:27:43,880 --> 00:27:47,440
the essence synergy distinction. So sometimes in Orthodox theology, yes,

463
00:27:48,319 --> 00:27:51,200
operations inner gay that's actually used in the New Testament

464
00:27:51,240 --> 00:27:54,640
multiple times of divine activity, so it signifies the divine

465
00:27:54,680 --> 00:27:58,799
activity within time and space. But there's another important aspect

466
00:27:59,039 --> 00:28:01,480
that I should add to here that for Orthodox this

467
00:28:01,559 --> 00:28:04,960
actually solves a lot of the disputes between the East

468
00:28:04,960 --> 00:28:08,880
and the West over the filioque and trinitarian questions, which

469
00:28:08,880 --> 00:28:10,400
I'm not trying to get into that, but it is

470
00:28:10,440 --> 00:28:13,160
important to Germane to our discussion because we don't believe

471
00:28:13,160 --> 00:28:17,400
that that, you know, it's necessarily the case that there's

472
00:28:17,440 --> 00:28:25,319
only actions of God towards creation or eternity. Now, in

473
00:28:25,359 --> 00:28:28,400
a sense, yes there could be. I mean, there are

474
00:28:28,480 --> 00:28:30,519
those two things. But I want I'm trying to say

475
00:28:30,519 --> 00:28:33,680
is that we believe in a level of energetic manifestation.

476
00:28:33,839 --> 00:28:36,839
So for example, when many of the church fathers talk

477
00:28:36,920 --> 00:28:41,880
about the Spirit being manifested eternally from the Sun, that

478
00:28:42,119 --> 00:28:45,279
is that our doctrine signal, which is laid out at

479
00:28:45,279 --> 00:28:48,759
the Council of Black Herne as eternal manifestation. We see

480
00:28:48,759 --> 00:28:53,519
that as different from hypostatic origin of the spirit. So

481
00:28:53,559 --> 00:28:55,680
the reason I say that is because it's not just

482
00:28:55,759 --> 00:28:58,920
the Spirit eternally manifesting the sun and the Spirit resting

483
00:28:58,960 --> 00:29:02,880
in the sun, as Gregor Palomas and Saint John Damascus say.

484
00:29:02,920 --> 00:29:06,319
It's John Adamascus who makes this distinction between eternal manifestation

485
00:29:06,720 --> 00:29:09,559
and hypostatic origin. This is why Saint John doesn't teach

486
00:29:09,559 --> 00:29:11,680
the philioquay, and in fact he rejects. He says that

487
00:29:11,720 --> 00:29:17,200
there's no, there's no co cause or co producer of

488
00:29:17,240 --> 00:29:20,279
the Spirit other than the Father. The Son does eternally

489
00:29:20,319 --> 00:29:24,359
manifest the Spirit, and not just that the Son and

490
00:29:24,440 --> 00:29:27,720
the entire trinity manifests. In other words, all the trinitarian

491
00:29:27,839 --> 00:29:30,559
operations are from the Father through his Son and the Spirit,

492
00:29:30,599 --> 00:29:34,799
and this applies to eternal manifestation as well. So, for example,

493
00:29:34,920 --> 00:29:40,119
some attributes of God are appropriate to all eternity. God's

494
00:29:40,200 --> 00:29:43,880
love has eternally manifested for all eternity in that trinitarian way.

495
00:29:44,359 --> 00:29:49,680
God's God's goodness has eternally manifested that way. But some

496
00:29:49,920 --> 00:29:53,279
actions of God, as you said, are proper appropriate to

497
00:29:53,599 --> 00:29:56,799
time and space, to history. Saint Gregor Palamas and Saint

498
00:29:56,799 --> 00:30:00,359
Maximus make this distinction. They talk about how God's us as,

499
00:30:00,400 --> 00:30:02,920
for example, in relationship to Sodom and Gomor, that was

500
00:30:02,960 --> 00:30:06,200
something that occurred within time and space and passed away.

501
00:30:06,759 --> 00:30:09,480
Some of God's actions occur within time and space and

502
00:30:09,519 --> 00:30:12,680
continue on into eternity, for example, the creation of the church,

503
00:30:13,000 --> 00:30:15,400
setting up in the church, and so forth, the incarnation

504
00:30:15,480 --> 00:30:18,440
of Christ. These begin in time and space and they

505
00:30:18,440 --> 00:30:21,240
continue on into eternity. So not all actions of God

506
00:30:21,359 --> 00:30:26,160
are necessarily just related to the intertrinitarian life of God

507
00:30:26,200 --> 00:30:29,319
at intra or God at extra there's also for us

508
00:30:29,400 --> 00:30:33,720
a very important other level of energetic manifestation, which is

509
00:30:33,759 --> 00:30:38,119
a helpful distinction and actually explains what is it oftentimes

510
00:30:38,160 --> 00:30:42,160
confused in Rumman Catholic teaching on the philioquay. So I

511
00:30:42,200 --> 00:30:44,519
just wanted to add that caveat, and also the second

512
00:30:44,519 --> 00:30:48,079
caveat that we don't actually accept act as purists. So

513
00:30:48,200 --> 00:30:52,119
you began your opening statement by saying, well, if we

514
00:30:52,160 --> 00:30:55,960
accept the first cause argument and the actress purist position,

515
00:30:56,519 --> 00:30:58,839
then it does logically lead to these other things. And

516
00:30:58,839 --> 00:31:01,880
I would say, you're right, does We would agree with that. However,

517
00:31:01,920 --> 00:31:05,079
we just simply don't accept that starting point. And this

518
00:31:05,160 --> 00:31:07,519
is the thing that I think most Thomas don't question

519
00:31:08,000 --> 00:31:09,960
is what if we just question that starting point? What

520
00:31:10,000 --> 00:31:13,839
if we just reject which starting point, the Plutonian and

521
00:31:13,880 --> 00:31:18,119
the Originistic doctrine, the Greek doctrine, the Hellenic doctrine of

522
00:31:18,160 --> 00:31:20,960
what simplicity is. For example, Botonis and in the Ideods

523
00:31:21,039 --> 00:31:25,240
he says God is an absolutely simple intellectual essence. God

524
00:31:25,359 --> 00:31:25,799
is So.

525
00:31:25,680 --> 00:31:27,400
Speaker 2: Sorry, hold on, because that's not the starting point. The

526
00:31:27,400 --> 00:31:29,880
starting point is just the notion of God is first cause?

527
00:31:29,960 --> 00:31:30,799
Is that what you're attacking.

528
00:31:33,000 --> 00:31:37,039
Speaker 1: Well, what I'm saying is that you can reason back

529
00:31:37,079 --> 00:31:40,000
through to talking about a first cause. It doesn't matter

530
00:31:40,039 --> 00:31:42,720
whether you want. When we're talking about divine simplicity, the

531
00:31:42,759 --> 00:31:46,559
starting point is that that cause has to be absolutely simple.

532
00:31:47,000 --> 00:31:49,720
Speaker 2: Yeah, that's not the starting point. The starting point is

533
00:31:49,720 --> 00:31:51,119
that there has to be a first cause, and we

534
00:31:51,279 --> 00:31:55,359
prove from or we try from the notion.

535
00:31:55,559 --> 00:31:59,240
Speaker 1: Okay, but we have, but we have a completely different

536
00:31:59,319 --> 00:32:02,519
order theologia. We don't do that kind of a reasoning

537
00:32:02,599 --> 00:32:05,680
back to the first cause. That's an Aristotelian doctrine. Now,

538
00:32:05,799 --> 00:32:08,559
church fathers talk about a first cause, but we don't

539
00:32:08,599 --> 00:32:12,640
talk about reasoning back to the first cause. In order

540
00:32:12,680 --> 00:32:15,599
to get to a definition of God as simple and

541
00:32:15,640 --> 00:32:18,759
then lay later by SuperNature, we tackle on the person's

542
00:32:18,839 --> 00:32:21,920
orthodoxiology is completely reversed. It's the other way around. We

543
00:32:22,039 --> 00:32:25,680
start with revelation from God and Christ, and that's how

544
00:32:25,720 --> 00:32:29,720
we don't know naturally about God being a first cause

545
00:32:29,920 --> 00:32:34,039
and then later God having three persons. It begins with

546
00:32:34,200 --> 00:32:36,799
a personal revelation of I am that I am. This

547
00:32:36,880 --> 00:32:40,599
is why Saint Gregory Palamas says to Barlem God doesn't

548
00:32:40,640 --> 00:32:43,559
say I am existent being, I am the super essence.

549
00:32:43,599 --> 00:32:46,839
He says I am he. For example, when Saint Basil

550
00:32:46,960 --> 00:32:51,200
argues against Eunomius, and he specifically argues on the question

551
00:32:51,279 --> 00:32:54,559
of what the one is till on, he argues that

552
00:32:54,640 --> 00:32:58,000
it is a personal plane, it is about hypostasis. It

553
00:32:58,039 --> 00:33:00,559
is I am he. It is not I am essence,

554
00:33:00,640 --> 00:33:03,200
I am super being, I am whatever. It's I am he.

555
00:33:03,440 --> 00:33:06,119
So even I know that you want to say, I'm

556
00:33:06,119 --> 00:33:09,519
not starting with super essence, I'm starting with first reasoning

557
00:33:09,559 --> 00:33:14,359
back to first cause, and then predicating about analogically about

558
00:33:14,359 --> 00:33:16,440
what this essence is. What I'm saying to you is

559
00:33:16,440 --> 00:33:18,839
that we just reject that whole process, the hope, the

560
00:33:18,960 --> 00:33:21,880
whole hold on. So there could be two things here.

561
00:33:21,920 --> 00:33:24,200
Speaker 2: So maybe you're saying that you just don't think that

562
00:33:24,279 --> 00:33:27,200
any proofs for Gaza distance work. Is that what you're planning.

563
00:33:27,960 --> 00:33:31,200
Speaker 1: No, we believe in the transcendental argument as most compatible

564
00:33:31,200 --> 00:33:34,240
with orthodox theology. Saint John Damascus makes a transcendental argument.

565
00:33:35,880 --> 00:33:38,200
But yes, I do believe the classical arguments don't work

566
00:33:38,279 --> 00:33:41,880
very well. Precisely before this, well, we got precisely because

567
00:33:41,880 --> 00:33:44,359
of what, because of this issue that we're talking about.

568
00:33:45,000 --> 00:33:46,839
Speaker 2: You mean they don't work because they get you in

569
00:33:46,839 --> 00:33:47,759
no place you don't want to be.

570
00:33:49,440 --> 00:33:51,599
Speaker 1: No, I mean I argue with atheists all the time

571
00:33:51,640 --> 00:33:55,759
and refute them quite quite the frequently because of the

572
00:33:55,759 --> 00:33:57,960
transcendental argument. So it doesn't leave me to a place.

573
00:33:58,119 --> 00:33:59,839
Speaker 2: No. I don't mean they like you don't want to

574
00:34:00,400 --> 00:34:01,559
I don't want there to be a guy. What I

575
00:34:01,640 --> 00:34:04,559
meant is you don't like the five ways, for example,

576
00:34:04,599 --> 00:34:06,240
because they would imply divine simplicity.

577
00:34:06,319 --> 00:34:09,880
Speaker 1: Is that what you're saying, they are bad arguments based

578
00:34:09,920 --> 00:34:14,519
on classical foundationals epistemology and orthodox anthropology doesn't make sense

579
00:34:14,559 --> 00:34:16,599
with classical foundationalistemology.

580
00:34:16,960 --> 00:34:20,079
Speaker 2: Okay, So I think I would like for this discussion

581
00:34:20,079 --> 00:34:22,280
to be fruitful. I think we should do maybe two things.

582
00:34:22,519 --> 00:34:24,280
Maybe this is a rabbit hole, so tell me if

583
00:34:24,320 --> 00:34:27,199
you don't want to do this. But so on the

584
00:34:27,239 --> 00:34:29,920
one hand, I think it would be good to probe

585
00:34:30,079 --> 00:34:33,760
this five ways issue a bit because I agree with

586
00:34:33,800 --> 00:34:37,320
you that if we if we think that those are bunk,

587
00:34:38,519 --> 00:34:41,599
then your arguments for divine simplicity are going to be

588
00:34:41,880 --> 00:34:44,800
take short of their foundation. But here's this other thing.

589
00:34:44,960 --> 00:34:47,320
Speaker 1: So it's right.

590
00:34:47,360 --> 00:34:50,559
Speaker 2: So let me grant you for a minute that they're

591
00:34:50,559 --> 00:34:53,119
a starting point as a Christian should be a revelation

592
00:34:53,440 --> 00:34:58,000
rather than natural reason, start from God speaking in the

593
00:34:58,000 --> 00:35:03,760
burning bush, rather than what we can know by the revelation,

594
00:35:03,800 --> 00:35:08,679
which is written in the world around us. Very Saint Paul, right,

595
00:35:08,960 --> 00:35:12,960
granting that, surely you would still want to maintain that

596
00:35:13,239 --> 00:35:16,960
whatever the God of revelation is, it's not caused, and

597
00:35:17,000 --> 00:35:19,519
it's the sort of thing whose explanation you don't have

598
00:35:19,599 --> 00:35:20,360
to seek.

599
00:35:20,280 --> 00:35:23,239
Speaker 1: Right, sure, I mean Eastern fathers will will say at

600
00:35:23,280 --> 00:35:26,039
times God is first cause. Saint JOHNA. Mascus says that

601
00:35:26,199 --> 00:35:26,719
I'm sure.

602
00:35:28,440 --> 00:35:30,480
Speaker 2: And so what I'm trying to do, and what I

603
00:35:30,519 --> 00:35:34,639
think divine simplicity does is it's a logical consequence of

604
00:35:36,320 --> 00:35:39,480
a coherent claim that God is the first cause. And

605
00:35:39,559 --> 00:35:41,880
so if you don't think that it follows from the

606
00:35:41,880 --> 00:35:44,039
claim that God is the first cause, I would be

607
00:35:44,039 --> 00:35:47,800
interested to see where where you think that argument comes apart.

608
00:35:48,119 --> 00:35:50,760
I can restate, why does the first cause have to

609
00:35:50,800 --> 00:35:51,880
be absolutely simple?

610
00:35:52,000 --> 00:35:56,519
Speaker 1: Why can't there be compositive first cause? I mean, there's

611
00:35:56,519 --> 00:35:58,559
no In other words, I have to accept a whole

612
00:35:58,559 --> 00:36:02,119
bunch of other life philosophical.

613
00:36:03,000 --> 00:36:04,440
Speaker 2: Of course, And I'm trying to figure out which of

614
00:36:04,480 --> 00:36:08,360
those premises you're attacking. So the premising question would be

615
00:36:08,719 --> 00:36:12,880
whenever you have two things that are right. So when

616
00:36:12,920 --> 00:36:16,039
I have an attribute, but let's just can we go

617
00:36:16,079 --> 00:36:18,000
with that as an example of composition.

618
00:36:19,599 --> 00:36:22,280
Speaker 1: Okay, but I go ahead?

619
00:36:23,000 --> 00:36:26,280
Speaker 2: Okay, Right, So when I have an attribute, right again,

620
00:36:28,199 --> 00:36:33,039
that's going to mean that the subject, according to the

621
00:36:33,039 --> 00:36:37,960
framework I'm using, the subject has been actualized by this

622
00:36:38,400 --> 00:36:42,159
distinct reality is inhering in it. And so it seems

623
00:36:42,199 --> 00:36:47,000
as though if you're going to grant that the composition

624
00:36:47,119 --> 00:36:49,760
of subject and accident can be analyzed into a relation

625
00:36:49,800 --> 00:36:53,239
to potency and act, and you want to maintain that

626
00:36:53,280 --> 00:36:58,039
God is not does not have potency, then you're going

627
00:36:58,079 --> 00:37:01,960
to have to grant a god you can accident. Now

628
00:37:02,280 --> 00:37:03,639
there are more prevacies there.

629
00:37:03,519 --> 00:37:07,119
Speaker 1: So go ahead, but we don't maintain that again, you

630
00:37:07,119 --> 00:37:09,360
don't maintain which part we don't believe that God is

631
00:37:09,400 --> 00:37:10,599
pure act with no potential.

632
00:37:11,679 --> 00:37:15,719
Speaker 2: Okay, So let's rewind then, So it seems as the

633
00:37:15,840 --> 00:37:19,599
when I look around at ordinary things, right, and I

634
00:37:19,679 --> 00:37:22,800
see that I'm staring at the coffee mug on my desk,

635
00:37:24,199 --> 00:37:27,039
I see that it is the certain shape, and I

636
00:37:27,039 --> 00:37:30,360
can ask why, right, And that's a good question to ask.

637
00:37:30,880 --> 00:37:34,199
It doesn't explain itself. It didn't have that shape and

638
00:37:34,239 --> 00:37:36,320
that color just because of the nature of the matter

639
00:37:36,400 --> 00:37:37,119
that makes it up.

640
00:37:37,639 --> 00:37:39,159
Speaker 1: Right, So I need to.

641
00:37:38,840 --> 00:37:42,519
Speaker 2: Seek outside of the cup for the reason why the

642
00:37:42,559 --> 00:37:45,880
cup is and why it is this way. And it's

643
00:37:45,920 --> 00:37:47,840
precisely because the cup didn't have.

644
00:37:47,800 --> 00:37:49,760
Speaker 1: To be this way. Yeah, I mean, I understand.

645
00:37:50,000 --> 00:37:52,320
Speaker 2: So in other words, whenever you have you have is

646
00:37:52,639 --> 00:37:56,000
which didn't have to be this way, and whenever you've

647
00:37:56,000 --> 00:37:57,920
got something which is this way but didn't have to

648
00:37:57,920 --> 00:37:59,800
be this way, you need to ask why.

649
00:38:00,960 --> 00:38:01,239
Speaker 1: Okay.

650
00:38:01,320 --> 00:38:03,360
Speaker 2: So I'm saying that if you say that God has potency,

651
00:38:04,360 --> 00:38:10,039
it's actualized, then you need to explain why that happened.

652
00:38:10,760 --> 00:38:12,760
Speaker 1: Sure. Well, the person I would say is that if

653
00:38:12,800 --> 00:38:16,719
I adopt the tonistic doctrine of what simplicity is, and

654
00:38:16,760 --> 00:38:20,199
if identify God's actions with his essence, then it's very

655
00:38:20,199 --> 00:38:22,800
difficult to see. And I would say, you can't argue

656
00:38:23,079 --> 00:38:25,679
that creation is actually a free action of God. Now,

657
00:38:25,760 --> 00:38:33,360
all historic orthodoxyology hold on because create the act of

658
00:38:33,400 --> 00:38:37,920
creating the world. I know, I know this objection quite well.

659
00:38:38,159 --> 00:38:40,519
More to this objection, which I bet you don't know,

660
00:38:40,559 --> 00:38:43,599
which is that it's not just a matter of whether

661
00:38:43,719 --> 00:38:47,840
or not the action of creating was constrained by God's essence,

662
00:38:47,840 --> 00:38:51,079
because they're identified. There's also a question of the divine exemplars.

663
00:38:51,880 --> 00:38:56,119
This is because it's multiple times in the Suma identifies

664
00:38:56,159 --> 00:39:00,800
the exemplars, the ideas behind the created things with the essence. Now,

665
00:39:00,840 --> 00:39:04,840
if creation is based on the exemplars, then creation it's

666
00:39:04,840 --> 00:39:08,000
hard to see how it's not also just as unchanging

667
00:39:08,039 --> 00:39:11,960
and eternal as the exemplars upon which they're based. And

668
00:39:12,119 --> 00:39:15,400
this is why worthodoxynology. That's why Saint Maximus and Gregory,

669
00:39:15,679 --> 00:39:18,599
they don't identify the ideas or the logo with the

670
00:39:18,719 --> 00:39:20,679
essence of God. They are the things around the God,

671
00:39:20,719 --> 00:39:24,400
around God. This is why Dionysius the Areopagite, who Aquinas

672
00:39:24,400 --> 00:39:28,000
cites multiple times that makes the distinction between essence and energy.

673
00:39:28,039 --> 00:39:30,280
This is why Dionysius says that you can never get

674
00:39:30,280 --> 00:39:33,920
to God's essence, and you can't even via negativa reason

675
00:39:33,960 --> 00:39:37,000
about God's essence. It's not just a question of unifical

676
00:39:37,199 --> 00:39:42,440
or analogical. Analogical analogical Another questions which we should say

677
00:39:42,480 --> 00:39:45,880
for a little bit, but theological doesn't work either because

678
00:39:45,960 --> 00:39:48,920
of the doctrine of divind's implicity as stated by Quinus.

679
00:39:50,000 --> 00:39:53,360
Speaker 2: Yeah, okay, so first thing, like, I would like to

680
00:39:53,440 --> 00:39:55,480
keep the ARGUMENTI I just gave separate from that.

681
00:39:55,599 --> 00:39:55,719
Speaker 1: Right.

682
00:39:55,760 --> 00:39:57,679
Speaker 2: So there's there's two things that both of us need

683
00:39:57,719 --> 00:39:59,519
to do in this debate, right. So one of them

684
00:39:59,599 --> 00:40:02,800
is make the case for why our position has to be,

685
00:40:02,920 --> 00:40:04,440
why we think it has to be the way it is,

686
00:40:04,840 --> 00:40:07,119
and the other one is to defend against objections to it.

687
00:40:07,719 --> 00:40:07,920
Speaker 1: Right.

688
00:40:08,000 --> 00:40:12,119
Speaker 2: So when I'm giving you the potency act argument, right,

689
00:40:12,159 --> 00:40:13,840
that's why I think it has to be the case.

690
00:40:13,880 --> 00:40:15,760
And then I need to defend against objections like and

691
00:40:15,800 --> 00:40:17,119
then how do you make sense of freedom?

692
00:40:17,559 --> 00:40:18,880
Speaker 1: Right? So likewise, but.

693
00:40:21,880 --> 00:40:25,960
Speaker 2: Energy essence, right, you're saying you need to One of

694
00:40:26,000 --> 00:40:27,719
the reasons why you believe in the energy is essence

695
00:40:27,719 --> 00:40:30,519
distinction is because you think it's necessary to say a

696
00:40:30,559 --> 00:40:31,360
guard divine freedom.

697
00:40:31,719 --> 00:40:32,320
Speaker 1: And then you have.

698
00:40:34,920 --> 00:40:36,679
Speaker 2: As an objection. Right, So let's let's just keep these

699
00:40:36,719 --> 00:40:37,719
two different things separate.

700
00:40:37,960 --> 00:40:40,559
Speaker 1: I believe it because it's revealed, and I also believe

701
00:40:40,719 --> 00:40:43,760
my view of what God is in terms of simplicity

702
00:40:43,840 --> 00:40:46,960
because it's revealed. I don't begin by looking at the

703
00:40:47,000 --> 00:40:49,719
composition of created things like coffee cups and try to

704
00:40:49,760 --> 00:40:51,960
reason back and say, well, there must have been a

705
00:40:52,000 --> 00:40:55,679
first simple cause that's not like a composite coffee cup.

706
00:40:56,239 --> 00:40:58,599
In fact, I don't have to go that route. And

707
00:40:59,039 --> 00:41:01,079
when you look at the early Church Fathers, when you

708
00:41:01,119 --> 00:41:03,760
look at the way Scripture talks about these things, it's

709
00:41:03,800 --> 00:41:06,760
a revealed doctrine, both of the persons and of what

710
00:41:06,920 --> 00:41:09,159
God's nature is, which we don't know what it is,

711
00:41:09,199 --> 00:41:11,880
of course, So no, we don't begin. As Paul says

712
00:41:11,880 --> 00:41:14,679
in Act seventeen, the divine ussia is not like any

713
00:41:14,719 --> 00:41:16,440
created thing. What he's arguing with you.

714
00:41:16,400 --> 00:41:18,760
Speaker 2: Don't need to argue with me about that. That's actually

715
00:41:18,840 --> 00:41:21,320
kind of both of our points. So anyway, keep going.

716
00:41:21,360 --> 00:41:24,639
Speaker 1: But but a Thomas also wants his cake and to

717
00:41:24,719 --> 00:41:27,400
eat it too, because he also says that this absolutely

718
00:41:27,400 --> 00:41:32,119
simple divine essence does that there is an analogical similarity

719
00:41:32,199 --> 00:41:36,679
between what's in this essence, the divine exemplars and the

720
00:41:36,719 --> 00:41:39,760
created forms, and the creative forms are nothing like an

721
00:41:39,800 --> 00:41:43,039
absolutely simple essence. So there's a divide where there's not

722
00:41:43,119 --> 00:41:46,199
a bridge between this absolutely simple essence because there's no

723
00:41:46,280 --> 00:41:50,440
uncreated grace, there's no bridge between the absolutely simple uncreated

724
00:41:50,480 --> 00:41:53,760
and the created, and they share no similarity. Then there's

725
00:41:53,760 --> 00:41:57,920
no basis for the analogia analogia innthis or the participation

726
00:41:58,000 --> 00:42:00,760
in God in terms of redemption. It's all created grace,

727
00:42:00,840 --> 00:42:05,199
it's all it's all bridged off by by Thomas's doctrine

728
00:42:05,199 --> 00:42:08,239
of simplicity. Now I recognize again that he wants there

729
00:42:08,280 --> 00:42:11,239
to be distinctions of persons. He wants there to be

730
00:42:11,519 --> 00:42:13,880
God acting within time and space in terms of the

731
00:42:13,880 --> 00:42:17,679
incarnation the logos somehow entering into a mode of being

732
00:42:17,719 --> 00:42:20,079
that the Father and the Spirit do not. But our

733
00:42:20,480 --> 00:42:23,519
contention is that in the system as a whole, with

734
00:42:23,599 --> 00:42:27,480
all Thomas's claims and presuppositions, it doesn't work. It's contradictory.

735
00:42:28,159 --> 00:42:30,920
Speaker 2: Yeah, yeah, yeah, no, let's let's keep So we've got

736
00:42:30,920 --> 00:42:33,079
three issues on the table as of this moment. Right.

737
00:42:33,079 --> 00:42:35,960
So we've got, on the one hand, my question, which

738
00:42:36,000 --> 00:42:38,920
you haven't answered yet, which is, how is it why

739
00:42:39,000 --> 00:42:42,440
is it that a compositive potency in act wouldn't need

740
00:42:42,440 --> 00:42:45,920
an explanation? You have the second question, which is you've

741
00:42:45,960 --> 00:42:48,360
addressed to me which I haven't answered yet, which is

742
00:42:48,440 --> 00:42:50,559
how it would be possible for an absolutely simple God

743
00:42:50,599 --> 00:42:53,599
to be free. And then there's the third question, which

744
00:42:53,599 --> 00:42:56,800
isn't a pistological question, which is if we don't if

745
00:42:56,800 --> 00:43:01,960
we grant that the divine essence is transcendent, what what

746
00:43:02,039 --> 00:43:05,719
are our predicates lashing onto? Right? And that's the problem

747
00:43:05,719 --> 00:43:09,000
with analogy. And so those are I think three separate issues.

748
00:43:09,039 --> 00:43:09,960
We should probably go over.

749
00:43:09,920 --> 00:43:12,039
Speaker 1: Them one by one. Okay, So the first one is

750
00:43:12,400 --> 00:43:14,199
I've already answered it, and I said, first of all,

751
00:43:14,239 --> 00:43:17,480
we don't accept that God is pure act with no potentiality.

752
00:43:19,079 --> 00:43:21,599
Speaker 2: That's not an answer though, right, because the way you

753
00:43:21,599 --> 00:43:25,000
need to explain to me is why is it?

754
00:43:25,559 --> 00:43:30,039
Speaker 1: So you're it is an answer because in Christian theology,

755
00:43:30,519 --> 00:43:33,559
God is not explained in that way. He's revealed a

756
00:43:33,559 --> 00:43:35,719
certain way. So what my answer to you is that

757
00:43:35,800 --> 00:43:39,039
we don't have an answer to to acquine us to

758
00:43:39,239 --> 00:43:44,199
Aristotle's dilemma of accidents and substance, because that's not how

759
00:43:44,239 --> 00:43:47,039
we look at and view God. We don't use that system.

760
00:43:47,159 --> 00:43:50,800
It wasn't used for the first thousand years. So I

761
00:43:50,800 --> 00:43:53,079
don't have to answer that question because it's not applicable

762
00:43:53,119 --> 00:43:56,320
to how we know who God is. We know who

763
00:43:56,400 --> 00:44:02,800
God is through revelation and through participating in that field life. Well,

764
00:44:02,840 --> 00:44:03,760
we're all on board with.

765
00:44:05,800 --> 00:44:10,320
Speaker 2: Saying that revelation is true, right, but the question is right.

766
00:44:10,360 --> 00:44:14,159
So I would challenge you to find examples in the

767
00:44:14,159 --> 00:44:17,360
scripture of saying that God is in potency to attributes

768
00:44:17,440 --> 00:44:20,400
or stuff like that.

769
00:44:21,199 --> 00:44:24,159
Speaker 1: You keep asking me, what where can I have as

770
00:44:24,159 --> 00:44:26,440
I do at least you keep asking me to use

771
00:44:26,920 --> 00:44:30,960
Arisitilian terminology and classifications and categories, and I just told

772
00:44:31,000 --> 00:44:32,719
you that we don't, and they're not in scripture, and

773
00:44:32,719 --> 00:44:34,239
they're not in the in the first thousand years of

774
00:44:34,280 --> 00:44:37,039
the church farm generally speaking.

775
00:44:37,079 --> 00:44:39,360
Speaker 2: The thing that you had said first was that you're

776
00:44:39,519 --> 00:44:43,840
fine with saying that God has potency least.

777
00:44:44,079 --> 00:44:46,760
Speaker 1: I was trying to speak to your terminology, for example,

778
00:44:46,840 --> 00:44:49,400
in Bradshaw's essays in his book, where he says that

779
00:44:49,480 --> 00:44:52,840
if we follow through what's saying that God has no potentiality,

780
00:44:53,039 --> 00:44:55,639
it's difficult to see how there's a free act of creation.

781
00:44:56,320 --> 00:44:59,760
But I'm moving the step back further and I'm saying

782
00:45:00,519 --> 00:45:04,159
we reject your doctrine of what simplicity is because it's

783
00:45:04,159 --> 00:45:05,920
direct from origin and.

784
00:45:07,320 --> 00:45:10,039
Speaker 2: I'm not interested in arguments from authority or where claims

785
00:45:10,039 --> 00:45:10,519
came from.

786
00:45:10,800 --> 00:45:16,800
Speaker 1: What I'm trying to for a thousand years, right matters.

787
00:45:16,880 --> 00:45:19,119
Of course, it matters where they came from. If you're

788
00:45:19,159 --> 00:45:22,760
if you're just rehashing Platinus, then that's a problem and

789
00:45:22,880 --> 00:45:24,800
a point does that? No?

790
00:45:24,800 --> 00:45:27,480
Speaker 2: No, I mean, look what we're trying to do, or

791
00:45:27,480 --> 00:45:29,039
at least here's what I'm trying to do. Right, So

792
00:45:29,039 --> 00:45:32,360
we've got we've got a revelation. We know by revelation

793
00:45:32,480 --> 00:45:34,960
a couple of things. We know more than a couple.

794
00:45:35,440 --> 00:45:37,519
We know that there is one God, and that he

795
00:45:37,599 --> 00:45:40,719
is the first cause of all things, that he's three persons,

796
00:45:40,800 --> 00:45:42,920
and that the second person became man and died.

797
00:45:42,920 --> 00:45:43,880
Speaker 1: For our sense, I mean.

798
00:45:47,360 --> 00:45:50,559
Speaker 2: Matters if something is directly contained in revelation. But like

799
00:45:51,079 --> 00:45:55,960
what where like these distinctions came from. I'm not sure why.

800
00:45:56,000 --> 00:45:59,599
That's germane right, So to say that Platinus originated this

801
00:45:59,639 --> 00:46:02,760
way understanding what it means to be the first one cool.

802
00:46:03,880 --> 00:46:09,000
Speaker 1: So, soology it does matter. It does matter because it's

803
00:46:09,039 --> 00:46:11,079
the doctrine of the Heretics and the doctrine of the

804
00:46:11,119 --> 00:46:13,599
Greeks that the early councils rejected. So every time the

805
00:46:13,639 --> 00:46:19,079
Christological controversies happen. They argue against guys who were influenced

806
00:46:19,079 --> 00:46:21,480
by Greek thought. This actually comes up in the writings

807
00:46:21,480 --> 00:46:23,480
of the Fathers and in the Councils. They say, you've

808
00:46:23,519 --> 00:46:26,559
been influenced by the Hellenic ideas of what simplicity is.

809
00:46:26,599 --> 00:46:30,360
So if Plotinus talks about simplicity in a certain way

810
00:46:30,480 --> 00:46:34,000
and in which it identifies all the names or attributes

811
00:46:34,039 --> 00:46:36,800
of the one with the essence of the one, and

812
00:46:36,840 --> 00:46:39,679
then when you know Meius says the exact same thing.

813
00:46:39,800 --> 00:46:41,800
In Saint Gregor Nissa writes an a hit or page

814
00:46:41,800 --> 00:46:45,519
book against Eunomius and makes this very argument, saying, Hey, Youunomius,

815
00:46:45,559 --> 00:46:49,119
you got your argument from Plotinus. I would say that

816
00:46:49,239 --> 00:46:52,599
I can just simply repeat that same argument against you,

817
00:46:52,679 --> 00:46:56,679
because a Quitas rehashes the same argument from Eunomius and

818
00:46:56,719 --> 00:47:00,239
from Plotinus. So absolutely tell.

819
00:47:00,239 --> 00:47:04,079
Speaker 2: Me, though, is that somebody who, by dint of using

820
00:47:04,159 --> 00:47:07,079
reason alone, with no help from revelation says some true

821
00:47:07,079 --> 00:47:11,320
things and some false things. No, that's not You who

822
00:47:11,360 --> 00:47:14,119
have the revelation should discard the baby with the bathwater.

823
00:47:14,360 --> 00:47:18,320
That's what I'm hearing. Like what I say, know, most.

824
00:47:18,079 --> 00:47:22,159
Speaker 1: Of these, most of these were fine with heedagogy. So

825
00:47:22,320 --> 00:47:24,039
you're making a strong man. I didn't say that we

826
00:47:24,119 --> 00:47:27,440
have to throw out all philosophy or anything a question.

827
00:47:28,360 --> 00:47:30,960
Speaker 2: If it's the case, the fact that Platinus said something

828
00:47:31,440 --> 00:47:32,440
means that it's wrong.

829
00:47:32,800 --> 00:47:36,880
Speaker 1: That's the origin of this proposition. Okay, do you do

830
00:47:36,880 --> 00:47:42,000
you understand big bid? Do you understand dialectics? Right? So,

831
00:47:42,039 --> 00:47:44,920
when the early church fathers are arguing against somebody like Celsus,

832
00:47:45,159 --> 00:47:48,000
or whether they're arguing against Arius, or whether they're arguing

833
00:47:48,039 --> 00:47:52,639
against Eunomius, they often talked about how these heretics employed dialectics.

834
00:47:53,159 --> 00:47:56,840
And so, for example, it's Platonis who pioneered this, right,

835
00:47:56,920 --> 00:47:59,599
it doesn't matter whether it's Platinus who said it or

836
00:47:59,599 --> 00:48:02,840
whether it's Nestorius who said it. The same heresy is

837
00:48:02,880 --> 00:48:05,719
being restated. Who cares who said it if it's wrong

838
00:48:05,920 --> 00:48:08,079
in principle, So I'll grant you that, yes, it doesn't

839
00:48:08,079 --> 00:48:10,639
matter ultimately who said it. But I'm saying that when

840
00:48:10,639 --> 00:48:13,159
the Church fathers argue against these things, they absolutely are

841
00:48:13,199 --> 00:48:16,400
concerned with the origin or the wellspring of where these

842
00:48:16,480 --> 00:48:19,199
errors come from. And I'm telling you that we reject

843
00:48:19,280 --> 00:48:22,599
the Greek philosophical origin of how we understand what simplicity

844
00:48:22,760 --> 00:48:25,599
is and we actually just go to what's revealed. That's

845
00:48:25,599 --> 00:48:28,079
what the Church fathers do. That that's why they reject

846
00:48:28,320 --> 00:48:32,119
Hellenic dialectics every time there's a council, and particularly the

847
00:48:32,119 --> 00:48:32,639
sixth count.

848
00:48:33,280 --> 00:48:35,519
Speaker 2: My only point is, I'm not going to accept it

849
00:48:35,599 --> 00:48:39,480
as a valid accounter argument that you say that this

850
00:48:39,599 --> 00:48:43,280
principle or whatever was articulated by Platinus, and Platinus tell

851
00:48:43,440 --> 00:48:45,920
some heretical views, therefore they must not hold this principle.

852
00:48:46,760 --> 00:48:49,880
Speaker 1: That's the argument. The argument is, your doctor of simplicity

853
00:48:49,960 --> 00:48:53,559
is the same as Platinass, and it's heretical man.

854
00:48:53,400 --> 00:48:55,599
Speaker 2: And it's certainly not the same as Platonis is because

855
00:48:55,639 --> 00:48:59,559
I hold the trinity right, the emination.

856
00:48:59,440 --> 00:49:04,840
Speaker 1: Of new from the already I already had one when

857
00:49:04,880 --> 00:49:07,519
I said that, the question wasn't whether Thomas also said

858
00:49:07,559 --> 00:49:11,639
correct things elsewhere, but whether the doctrine simplicity itself wasn't

859
00:49:11,639 --> 00:49:14,440
the exact same as what Platina said. And when Platina

860
00:49:14,480 --> 00:49:17,639
says that all the acts and names and operations of

861
00:49:17,639 --> 00:49:20,199
God or the One are exactly the same as the essence,

862
00:49:20,239 --> 00:49:22,639
that's the same as what Aquina says. And so when

863
00:49:22,719 --> 00:49:25,199
This is why Origin was led to say that the

864
00:49:25,199 --> 00:49:28,599
son is a different subsistence or a different kind of

865
00:49:29,039 --> 00:49:33,559
created subsistence, different from the Father, because he identified the

866
00:49:33,639 --> 00:49:36,119
hypostasis of the father with the essence. This is why

867
00:49:36,239 --> 00:49:41,159
you Nomius identified the father with unoriginate and with absolutely

868
00:49:41,199 --> 00:49:41,880
simple essence.

869
00:49:42,079 --> 00:49:44,119
Speaker 2: In other words, you're saying that you think that the

870
00:49:44,159 --> 00:49:48,559
platinum doctrine Platita thinks that the one is completely simple. Okay, fine,

871
00:49:48,679 --> 00:49:51,920
and that this one means can only be one hypostasis

872
00:49:51,920 --> 00:49:53,960
in itself. It can't be three that have the nature

873
00:49:54,000 --> 00:49:55,239
of the one. If you could even speak of the

874
00:49:55,280 --> 00:49:57,599
nature of the one, that you probably can't. For him,

875
00:49:58,159 --> 00:50:00,800
and Thomas wants to hold that that same doctrine of

876
00:50:00,800 --> 00:50:05,719
divine simplicity, you say, but with but also persons, correct?

877
00:50:05,760 --> 00:50:09,559
Speaker 1: Is that right? Yes, it's the same philosophical Greek idea

878
00:50:09,559 --> 00:50:12,679
of what simplicity is, and then also the idea of

879
00:50:12,760 --> 00:50:15,480
let's also tack on persons. Let's use the Greeks and

880
00:50:15,559 --> 00:50:17,920
so far as they were good at talking about simplicity

881
00:50:17,960 --> 00:50:21,199
and the monad, and let's tack on three hypostasies. And

882
00:50:21,239 --> 00:50:24,360
the argument is that given what's said in Greek and

883
00:50:24,400 --> 00:50:27,000
Hellenic thought generally that I'm talking about here about what

884
00:50:27,079 --> 00:50:30,639
simplicity is. It doesn't there's no place for real distinctions

885
00:50:30,639 --> 00:50:33,159
in the persons. This is why it leads to modalism.

886
00:50:33,559 --> 00:50:34,360
This is why.

887
00:50:36,400 --> 00:50:38,760
Speaker 2: Do you want to get to Aquinas's trinitarian theory then,

888
00:50:38,760 --> 00:50:40,440
because that would be our next step. I'm still going

889
00:50:40,480 --> 00:50:42,519
to say, I'm like, I would like to go back

890
00:50:42,519 --> 00:50:47,280
to the problem of whether or not you're willing to

891
00:50:47,280 --> 00:50:49,719
say that God has potency, So I'm going to take

892
00:50:49,760 --> 00:50:51,119
that as just bracketed for the moment. Do you want

893
00:50:51,159 --> 00:50:52,239
to go to trinity instead?

894
00:50:53,079 --> 00:50:56,039
Speaker 1: I mean, if you listen to what I say, right,

895
00:50:56,079 --> 00:50:59,199
So when I said yes, if you want to use

896
00:50:59,239 --> 00:51:03,360
your language and say does God have potency, then I

897
00:51:03,360 --> 00:51:06,559
would say in the sense of him not having to create,

898
00:51:06,639 --> 00:51:08,880
but yet he chose to create. That is.

899
00:51:11,079 --> 00:51:13,239
Speaker 2: So, well, this is just a verbal that part is

900
00:51:13,320 --> 00:51:16,360
just a verbal distinction, right. So Aquinas constantly uses this

901
00:51:16,440 --> 00:51:20,159
distinction between active and passive potency, and the only kind

902
00:51:20,159 --> 00:51:22,760
of which he's going to deny of God as passive potency,

903
00:51:22,760 --> 00:51:24,840
which is the kind of has.

904
00:51:25,320 --> 00:51:27,239
Speaker 1: Let's just we can cut past all this and just

905
00:51:27,280 --> 00:51:29,719
make it very clear that that Aquinas says that all

906
00:51:29,719 --> 00:51:32,880
the distinctions and the attributes of God are notional. They're

907
00:51:32,880 --> 00:51:36,119
not real that they're just conceptual distinctions that we make.

908
00:51:36,679 --> 00:51:39,039
And so God's love is the exact same as the

909
00:51:39,159 --> 00:51:41,599
essence is the exact same as the Foregnoledge is exact

910
00:51:41,639 --> 00:51:47,599
same as the act of creating. That's ultimately foolish. I

911
00:51:47,639 --> 00:51:49,079
agree with the first part of the claim.

912
00:51:49,760 --> 00:51:52,559
Speaker 2: Right, So he does say that God's essence is the

913
00:51:52,559 --> 00:51:54,760
same as his active loving himself, which is the same

914
00:51:54,800 --> 00:51:56,599
as his active knowing himself. It is the same as

915
00:51:56,599 --> 00:51:58,960
his active existence, which is the same as the act

916
00:51:59,000 --> 00:52:02,159
by which He makes all things that it's.

917
00:52:02,039 --> 00:52:04,119
Speaker 1: Also the attributes that are the same as the essence

918
00:52:04,159 --> 00:52:04,440
of God.

919
00:52:06,079 --> 00:52:12,639
Speaker 2: Sure, so then you were talking about we're trying we're

920
00:52:12,639 --> 00:52:16,119
talking about acting passive power. Right, So obviously right, God

921
00:52:16,480 --> 00:52:20,119
can make things that he hasn't made. But for a

922
00:52:20,199 --> 00:52:23,679
quintas that doesn't imply that God is. What we need

923
00:52:23,719 --> 00:52:26,679
to avoid is saying that God is receiving something or

924
00:52:26,760 --> 00:52:31,079
being actualized by something which he did not have to

925
00:52:31,159 --> 00:52:34,039
receive or be actualized by. Right, Does that Does that

926
00:52:34,039 --> 00:52:36,039
make sense? Raison, What we're trying to do is exclude

927
00:52:37,519 --> 00:52:40,880
receptivity or passivity from the divine nature?

928
00:52:44,480 --> 00:52:44,719
Speaker 1: Right?

929
00:52:45,199 --> 00:52:46,639
Speaker 2: Is that a goal that you're okay with? Or do

930
00:52:46,719 --> 00:52:47,800
I need to defend that one?

931
00:52:48,119 --> 00:52:50,800
Speaker 1: I don't think that that any Orthodox person would say

932
00:52:50,840 --> 00:52:54,280
that God's that God needed anything in his nature or

933
00:52:54,280 --> 00:52:55,079
anything like that.

934
00:52:55,079 --> 00:52:58,480
Speaker 2: That that that's when I say that God doesn't have potency.

935
00:52:58,559 --> 00:53:01,199
That's just what I mean. Right, So the cup is

936
00:53:01,199 --> 00:53:03,760
in potency to this shape or that shape by virtue,

937
00:53:04,000 --> 00:53:07,679
but it's matter, and so it's being actualized by that,

938
00:53:07,719 --> 00:53:10,119
and so the cups needed some sort of shape.

939
00:53:10,239 --> 00:53:10,760
Speaker 1: That's what we.

940
00:53:10,760 --> 00:53:14,199
Speaker 2: Deny when we deny that God has potency and Aristotelian terms,

941
00:53:14,280 --> 00:53:15,760
if you want, if you if you like the word

942
00:53:16,000 --> 00:53:20,440
need better or open slot or whatever, that's fine, same idea. Okay,

943
00:53:20,880 --> 00:53:23,199
So are we okay? Can we then agree that God

944
00:53:23,239 --> 00:53:23,559
doesn't have.

945
00:53:23,599 --> 00:53:27,440
Speaker 1: Potent as far as I can tell, yes, that makes sense. Okay.

946
00:53:28,719 --> 00:53:33,000
Speaker 2: So that's all that we're trying to maintain when we

947
00:53:33,039 --> 00:53:37,679
hold that God is entirely simple. We don't want anything

948
00:53:37,880 --> 00:53:40,719
in God which would fill a slot.

949
00:53:41,440 --> 00:53:44,440
Speaker 1: That's really that's not all.

950
00:53:45,599 --> 00:53:48,719
Speaker 2: That that's our reason for holding it. Okay. So if

951
00:53:48,760 --> 00:53:50,440
you can show what you need to do, and this

952
00:53:50,480 --> 00:53:52,159
is what I tried to do, in my own DISSERTATIONE. Right,

953
00:53:52,159 --> 00:53:54,400
So I'm arguing with you, but I'm actually at least

954
00:53:54,400 --> 00:53:56,440
half on your side. So we get to that part

955
00:53:56,440 --> 00:53:59,920
in a minute. But what you would need to do

956
00:54:00,719 --> 00:54:06,199
is to explain why the kind of multiplicity that you

957
00:54:06,239 --> 00:54:11,679
want doesn't involve actualizing or filling a need or an

958
00:54:11,679 --> 00:54:14,519
open slot or whatever in the divinity.

959
00:54:15,000 --> 00:54:16,599
Speaker 1: Yeah, I would, just because that makes sense, I would

960
00:54:16,639 --> 00:54:22,320
throw out of all these categories, big part I would

961
00:54:22,360 --> 00:54:23,320
throw out.

962
00:54:27,119 --> 00:54:32,880
Speaker 2: Well, surely though, you're going to agree now, No, you can.

963
00:54:32,920 --> 00:54:35,039
What you can what you can do is you can

964
00:54:35,079 --> 00:54:38,880
tell me that these things right, So give me an

965
00:54:38,920 --> 00:54:42,840
example of multiplicity, say the divine persons. You can say us, well, agree,

966
00:54:42,840 --> 00:54:46,960
of course, but this multiplicity does not involve an actualization

967
00:54:47,000 --> 00:54:48,599
of the divine essence, and so we can allow it.

968
00:54:49,760 --> 00:54:49,960
Speaker 1: Right.

969
00:54:50,599 --> 00:54:52,559
Speaker 2: But what you need to do is for every case

970
00:54:52,760 --> 00:54:55,920
of an energy that you describe, you need to explain

971
00:54:55,960 --> 00:55:00,559
to the temist why this doesn't count as right, Why this,

972
00:55:01,000 --> 00:55:03,119
why you don't need these categories right, why they don't apply.

973
00:55:03,880 --> 00:55:06,320
I think the onness is on you.

974
00:55:06,360 --> 00:55:08,880
Speaker 1: No, it's not, because, first of all, there is a

975
00:55:09,000 --> 00:55:13,760
thousand years of the Church using categories and explanations in

976
00:55:13,880 --> 00:55:17,480
terms that are not Tomistic and are not Aristotelian. So

977
00:55:17,480 --> 00:55:20,440
we already have like the use of this. So it's

978
00:55:20,480 --> 00:55:23,039
the onus is not on me, but actually on in this.

979
00:55:23,239 --> 00:55:25,920
Of course, you know, it was very controversial when when

980
00:55:26,000 --> 00:55:30,880
Tomism began to adopt the restilianism. Uh so, And ultimately, yes,

981
00:55:30,960 --> 00:55:32,880
it's not you know so much about this or that

982
00:55:32,920 --> 00:55:38,519
specific term, but it's about the the almost scientistic approach

983
00:55:38,760 --> 00:55:42,360
to dissecting God in this way and not looking at

984
00:55:42,400 --> 00:55:46,719
how the revelation of what hoopostasis is in the New

985
00:55:46,760 --> 00:55:49,760
Testament or what innergaia is as opposed to fusis in

986
00:55:49,800 --> 00:55:50,519
the New Testament.

987
00:55:51,119 --> 00:55:54,079
Speaker 2: Right, I don't know what you mean by scientistic right,

988
00:55:54,079 --> 00:55:56,760
what we've gotten as the data of revelation, right, we've.

989
00:55:56,559 --> 00:56:00,280
Speaker 1: Got it's not data. It's it's not natural revelation as

990
00:56:00,320 --> 00:56:03,559
a science. Theology is not the queen of science. That's

991
00:56:03,599 --> 00:56:08,760
what I mean by scientistic. Right. It's about it's about understanding,

992
00:56:08,840 --> 00:56:15,599
yes it is, but that means that understanding comes through

993
00:56:15,840 --> 00:56:18,440
the direct experience of God, not through the intellect.

994
00:56:19,320 --> 00:56:21,840
Speaker 2: Well, okay, so if you want to say that the

995
00:56:21,880 --> 00:56:25,239
only proper knowledge of God is by mystical vision and

996
00:56:25,280 --> 00:56:27,079
then we're just wasting our time talking about him.

997
00:56:27,280 --> 00:56:31,880
Speaker 1: Right, that's probably true. I believe in an analogia that's

998
00:56:31,960 --> 00:56:35,239
applicable to the energies. Right, so the logoi to read,

999
00:56:35,239 --> 00:56:38,280
say Maximus, the doctrine of the logoi, which he identifies

1000
00:56:38,320 --> 00:56:43,159
as divine ideas. Uh, they're uncreated energies, they're not the

1001
00:56:43,280 --> 00:56:46,039
essence of God. And so again what you notice is

1002
00:56:46,039 --> 00:56:50,079
that what distinguishes the Orthodox position consistently across the board.

1003
00:56:50,079 --> 00:56:51,800
That's why I started out talking about how we have

1004
00:56:51,840 --> 00:56:55,039
a different anthropology, we have a different triology, we have

1005
00:56:55,079 --> 00:56:58,679
a different doctrine of Christology, and a different eschatology and

1006
00:56:58,719 --> 00:57:00,880
a different ecclesiology. Is cause of the U S and

1007
00:57:00,920 --> 00:57:03,559
S energy distinction and all these different points. So it's

1008
00:57:03,559 --> 00:57:05,800
a whole system. It's it's holistic in our U.

1009
00:57:06,639 --> 00:57:08,840
Speaker 2: I understand that. But so let me just try to

1010
00:57:08,880 --> 00:57:10,960
plug it in. Since your we're back to energy, let's

1011
00:57:11,000 --> 00:57:15,960
just try to plug in that term energy into the

1012
00:57:16,039 --> 00:57:19,039
question I was asking you. All Right, so what if

1013
00:57:19,039 --> 00:57:21,159
Thomas is going to be worried about when he hears

1014
00:57:21,280 --> 00:57:27,079
you're talking about divine energies. Is the question of whether

1015
00:57:27,199 --> 00:57:31,280
these energies would be such as to actualize the divinessence.

1016
00:57:31,280 --> 00:57:33,480
I assume correct me if I'm wrong. I think you

1017
00:57:33,480 --> 00:57:36,079
would want to say that, in fact, they don't actualize

1018
00:57:36,079 --> 00:57:40,079
the divine essence, and that they're not received by or

1019
00:57:41,199 --> 00:57:45,320
that they're not principles of God's existence or God's nature

1020
00:57:45,360 --> 00:57:47,320
at all. What I'm trying to tell you that you

1021
00:57:47,480 --> 00:57:50,119
have anything God? Is that fair statement?

1022
00:57:50,960 --> 00:57:53,000
Speaker 1: Yeah? But what I've been trying to convey is that

1023
00:57:53,039 --> 00:57:55,639
you have to reject homism. Right, this whole system is

1024
00:57:55,639 --> 00:57:58,559
a problem. So because you are trying to force me

1025
00:57:58,639 --> 00:58:01,480
into the risk of to you categor worries, I'm trying to.

1026
00:58:01,440 --> 00:58:05,239
Speaker 2: Tell you an It's just this is not like Aristotle.

1027
00:58:05,920 --> 00:58:09,840
Say that and not right, and that's something is necessary

1028
00:58:09,880 --> 00:58:11,679
or contingent. This is not Aristotle.

1029
00:58:11,760 --> 00:58:14,880
Speaker 1: This is just about you were talking about in potentia

1030
00:58:14,920 --> 00:58:16,440
and actuality and active through.

1031
00:58:17,360 --> 00:58:20,920
Speaker 2: It just means can be. It's what can be. That's

1032
00:58:21,000 --> 00:58:24,960
all it is. I know that's not Aristotle's copyright.

1033
00:58:26,199 --> 00:58:28,559
Speaker 1: I know what contingency means. What I'm telling you is

1034
00:58:28,599 --> 00:58:31,000
that you are a Tomas and these categories that you're

1035
00:58:31,039 --> 00:58:34,239
talking about did come from Aristotle, and they were introduced

1036
00:58:34,239 --> 00:58:38,760
by Uh. You know Thomas and his his teacher Albert Magnus,

1037
00:58:38,800 --> 00:58:41,159
they were not the norm for the first thousand years

1038
00:58:41,159 --> 00:58:43,480
of the church. Now why weren't they the norm? Precisely

1039
00:58:43,559 --> 00:58:46,679
because of the questions.

1040
00:58:47,199 --> 00:58:51,000
Speaker 2: And we're not trying to have an argument about terms here,

1041
00:58:51,719 --> 00:58:53,000
You're you're saying the.

1042
00:58:53,119 --> 00:58:58,079
Speaker 1: Part we are because because we reject your doctrine of simplicity. Doctrine,

1043
00:58:58,199 --> 00:59:02,639
don't can you not see that, Helen doc simplicity can

1044
00:59:02,679 --> 00:59:03,280
be questioned.

1045
00:59:04,880 --> 00:59:07,280
Speaker 2: Of course you can be questioned, but I'm saying that

1046
00:59:07,320 --> 00:59:09,960
this doctrine of simplicity arrest like you can be questioned,

1047
00:59:09,960 --> 00:59:15,639
I don't think that it can be successfully debunked. But okay,

1048
00:59:15,119 --> 00:59:17,000
well reason.

1049
00:59:17,400 --> 00:59:19,559
Speaker 1: So there's a whole there's a whole, eight hundred page

1050
00:59:19,599 --> 00:59:22,760
book that debunks it, written by Saint Grego. There are

1051
00:59:22,760 --> 00:59:27,440
lots of books that try to that's another the Doctor

1052
00:59:27,480 --> 00:59:30,440
of the Church and he and he shows that Eunomianism

1053
00:59:30,519 --> 00:59:33,039
is modalism based on it's his doctrine simplicity. It's the

1054
00:59:33,039 --> 00:59:35,519
exact same doctor simplicity.

1055
00:59:36,039 --> 00:59:39,159
Speaker 2: Hold on, we're not here to just trade claims. You're

1056
00:59:39,199 --> 00:59:41,119
wrong or you're wrong, right. We're here to try to

1057
00:59:41,119 --> 00:59:43,760
evaluate arguments as best as we can, right, And so

1058
00:59:44,679 --> 00:59:46,280
the argument that.

1059
00:59:45,960 --> 00:59:50,599
Speaker 1: That Aquinas's doctrine simplicity is exact same as eunomius doctrine simplicity,

1060
00:59:51,000 --> 00:59:56,480
and although the conclusions are different, Eunomius is refuted in

1061
00:59:56,519 --> 00:59:59,159
eight hundred pages by Saint Gregoranissa and the whole argument

1062
00:59:59,239 --> 01:00:02,199
is based on essence, energy distinction, as well as other things.

1063
01:00:02,440 --> 01:00:05,840
Speaker 2: Okay, so let me latch onto that. Then how are

1064
01:00:05,880 --> 01:00:11,159
you defining the divine simplicity doctrine, which you say Aquinas

1065
01:00:11,159 --> 01:00:12,079
shares with Eunomias.

1066
01:00:13,639 --> 01:00:17,039
Speaker 1: Well, I can look at the suma under the questions

1067
01:00:17,199 --> 01:00:20,320
like question three the simplicity of God, where it's stated

1068
01:00:20,400 --> 01:00:23,320
very clearly in those what eight questions? I think he says,

1069
01:00:23,639 --> 01:00:28,800
is God composite? Is the simple? Is God's existence exact

1070
01:00:28,840 --> 01:00:31,000
same as his essence? Yes? It is? Is there any

1071
01:00:31,000 --> 01:00:33,719
accidents in God? No? Are the attributes the same as

1072
01:00:33,760 --> 01:00:34,400
the essence of God?

1073
01:00:34,480 --> 01:00:34,639
Speaker 2: Yes?

1074
01:00:34,679 --> 01:00:37,960
Speaker 1: Are they just logical distinctions? Yes? So forth and so on.

1075
01:00:38,320 --> 01:00:39,960
I mean, there's not a whole lot of debate. I

1076
01:00:39,960 --> 01:00:43,719
wouldn't think about what Thomas says divine.

1077
01:00:43,480 --> 01:00:46,599
Speaker 2: And so you're holding the Eunomius holds likewise that God

1078
01:00:46,679 --> 01:00:48,440
is identical to anything that can be said of him,

1079
01:00:48,440 --> 01:00:49,719
and therefore there can't be a trinity.

1080
01:00:50,000 --> 01:00:54,079
Speaker 1: The only difference, the only difference between Aquinas and Eunomius

1081
01:00:54,719 --> 01:00:57,400
is that Aquinas wants there to be a via negativa

1082
01:00:57,760 --> 01:01:04,239
and Eunomius didn't. Ah, you can you can fall on

1083
01:01:04,280 --> 01:01:06,119
two sides of this coin. You can fall on the

1084
01:01:06,239 --> 01:01:08,440
on the side of the coin with the quietness where

1085
01:01:08,440 --> 01:01:09,519
you want both things to.

1086
01:01:09,440 --> 01:01:12,559
Speaker 2: Be true, or you can follow on both things are white,

1087
01:01:12,800 --> 01:01:16,320
the trinity of persons and unity of nature? That what

1088
01:01:17,400 --> 01:01:19,079
well were the three of the two things are a

1089
01:01:19,119 --> 01:01:20,960
trinity of persons and simplicity of nature?

1090
01:01:23,519 --> 01:01:24,239
Speaker 1: What two things?

1091
01:01:25,599 --> 01:01:28,360
Speaker 2: That's the whole both things at once? What two things?

1092
01:01:28,480 --> 01:01:31,079
Simplicity of nature, persons.

1093
01:01:31,719 --> 01:01:37,199
Speaker 1: And the via negativa where we can predicate analogically of God.

1094
01:01:37,800 --> 01:01:40,119
Speaker 2: I'm not sure that the via negativa issue is what's

1095
01:01:40,119 --> 01:01:40,840
at stake here.

1096
01:01:40,679 --> 01:01:45,039
Speaker 1: So let me this is why. It's the exact same

1097
01:01:45,079 --> 01:01:48,159
debate that Saint Gregory had with Barleum. Barleam says that

1098
01:01:48,199 --> 01:01:51,760
when we predicate of God, we predicate of him substantially

1099
01:01:51,760 --> 01:01:55,239
but analogically, and Saint Gregory responds by saying, if God

1100
01:01:55,360 --> 01:01:57,960
is an absolutely simple essence, and you only know creative effects.

1101
01:01:58,000 --> 01:02:00,400
You don't actually know God. You don't actually know God

1102
01:02:00,440 --> 01:02:03,800
because you never know whether you're experiencing what attribute, because

1103
01:02:03,800 --> 01:02:06,840
all the attributes are divine essence A right, I mean,

1104
01:02:07,480 --> 01:02:09,400
you're experiencing love. How do you know you're experiencing love

1105
01:02:09,440 --> 01:02:11,679
or justice or pere knowledge or what? You never know

1106
01:02:11,719 --> 01:02:13,480
because they're all the same as a divine essence. And

1107
01:02:13,519 --> 01:02:15,199
you don't ever participate in God.

1108
01:02:14,840 --> 01:02:18,440
Speaker 2: And I'm happy to get into a problem of analogical predication,

1109
01:02:18,480 --> 01:02:21,320
but I'm not sure that's the same problem. Can we

1110
01:02:21,320 --> 01:02:29,079
see trinity for just a sec Okay, so let me

1111
01:02:29,119 --> 01:02:31,480
just try it. Maybe this will or maybe this won't

1112
01:02:31,519 --> 01:02:34,840
be germane to the to your point, but let me

1113
01:02:34,880 --> 01:02:37,639
try to give Aquitance's defense. Right, So this is now

1114
01:02:38,400 --> 01:02:40,519
the other side of the coins, not arguing force position.

1115
01:02:40,559 --> 01:02:43,800
It's repelling objections, explaining why he thinks that his doctrine

1116
01:02:43,800 --> 01:02:46,519
of simplicity is compatible with the trinity of persons, right,

1117
01:02:46,519 --> 01:02:48,000
because it seems to me that you're just saying that

1118
01:02:48,079 --> 01:02:50,000
straight up. It's just a case of trying to have

1119
01:02:50,079 --> 01:02:52,920
your cake and eat it too, right, right, correct? Yeah,

1120
01:02:53,599 --> 01:02:59,880
so Aquitances claim he holds divine simplicity to this extent.

1121
01:03:00,320 --> 01:03:05,800
He doesn't want there to be anything in God which

1122
01:03:06,159 --> 01:03:11,360
actualizes or is a principle of God's existence. Now, the

1123
01:03:11,360 --> 01:03:13,639
reason why he thinks this is compatible with there being

1124
01:03:13,719 --> 01:03:18,760
three subsistent relations in the divinity is because of how

1125
01:03:18,800 --> 01:03:23,360
he understands the nature of relation in particular. Right, so

1126
01:03:23,599 --> 01:03:26,360
he does more arsitilian framework.

1127
01:03:26,440 --> 01:03:26,880
Speaker 1: Bear with me.

1128
01:03:28,400 --> 01:03:33,760
Speaker 2: So in his framework, every anything, all ten of the

1129
01:03:33,800 --> 01:03:37,239
categories are going to have two sides to them. Right,

1130
01:03:37,280 --> 01:03:40,840
There's going to be the essay side, and there's going

1131
01:03:40,880 --> 01:03:43,280
to be the form of the Razio side.

1132
01:03:44,320 --> 01:03:45,480
Speaker 1: Right, So you have.

1133
01:03:47,000 --> 01:03:50,920
Speaker 2: Dog nature and a substantial form, and you have the

1134
01:03:51,159 --> 01:03:53,599
essay which is proper to it, which is subsistent essay.

1135
01:03:53,880 --> 01:03:54,960
Speaker 1: And then you have.

1136
01:03:56,760 --> 01:03:59,639
Speaker 2: Quantity his form. And then there's the essay which is

1137
01:03:59,639 --> 01:04:04,400
proper to which is n s or inherence, and the

1138
01:04:04,400 --> 01:04:08,280
same for quality. And in the case of these two,

1139
01:04:09,320 --> 01:04:14,000
there's a double sort of inherence. According to Aquinas, So

1140
01:04:15,079 --> 01:04:20,440
quantity and here's.

1141
01:04:18,440 --> 01:04:19,440
Speaker 1: This cup is big.

1142
01:04:19,519 --> 01:04:22,800
Speaker 2: Let's say quantity and here's a subject, both in the

1143
01:04:22,840 --> 01:04:25,679
sense that it draws its existence from that subject.

1144
01:04:25,760 --> 01:04:26,199
Speaker 1: Right, it doesn't.

1145
01:04:26,400 --> 01:04:28,599
Speaker 2: Quantity doesn't just hang out on its own, and it's

1146
01:04:28,599 --> 01:04:31,679
always the quantity of something. And here's in that sense,

1147
01:04:32,320 --> 01:04:34,440
and here is in a further sense, which is that

1148
01:04:34,559 --> 01:04:38,280
it posits that content, that formal content in the subject

1149
01:04:38,320 --> 01:04:45,480
and makes that cup b three ounces whatever. Right, So

1150
01:04:45,519 --> 01:04:49,920
it serves now as a principle of that cup's being,

1151
01:04:50,000 --> 01:04:53,320
makes that could be in a certain way. Okay, And

1152
01:04:53,400 --> 01:04:55,360
same for quality. So all the things that we normally

1153
01:04:55,400 --> 01:04:59,440
think of as attributes, whereas accidents have this double inherence

1154
01:04:59,480 --> 01:05:02,840
that they exists in the subject, draw their existence from it,

1155
01:05:03,000 --> 01:05:04,400
and they make it be in a certain way. So

1156
01:05:04,400 --> 01:05:09,159
Aquitans is going to deny that there can be any

1157
01:05:09,599 --> 01:05:13,480
anything predicated of God, anything really distinct from God in

1158
01:05:13,519 --> 01:05:16,840
hearing in him, after the fashion of quantity or quality.

1159
01:05:17,360 --> 01:05:19,599
And the reason is because quantity or equality and here

1160
01:05:19,679 --> 01:05:23,840
is in that second way. And thus would if really

1161
01:05:23,840 --> 01:05:28,719
distinct from God, add something to God's being? Relation is

1162
01:05:28,800 --> 01:05:31,360
different according to Aquinas, because it doesn't do that. And

1163
01:05:31,599 --> 01:05:33,400
here's only in the first way.

1164
01:05:33,480 --> 01:05:34,119
Speaker 1: Still got an.

1165
01:05:34,119 --> 01:05:42,800
Speaker 2: Essay one creatures, but it doesn't make its subject. It

1166
01:05:42,840 --> 01:05:45,599
doesn't it doesn't add any new content to the subject.

1167
01:05:45,960 --> 01:05:46,079
Speaker 1: Right.

1168
01:05:46,119 --> 01:05:48,320
Speaker 2: So, and you've got these two cups that are equal

1169
01:05:48,360 --> 01:05:53,000
in size to each other the size right, that's in

1170
01:05:53,000 --> 01:05:57,079
the category of quantity, posits content in the subject, actualizes

1171
01:05:57,079 --> 01:06:03,440
it and modifies it. And based on the fact that

1172
01:06:03,480 --> 01:06:05,360
it's got this thing which is modifying it, it's got

1173
01:06:05,360 --> 01:06:09,079
this other feature, which is the relation of equality, which

1174
01:06:09,079 --> 01:06:13,159
doesn't add anything to the cup at all, doesn't make it,

1175
01:06:13,199 --> 01:06:16,320
doesn't modify, it doesn't actualize, it doesn't limit it nothing.

1176
01:06:17,800 --> 01:06:22,719
So it's it's Rozzio guerna Quinas is pure towardness, purely

1177
01:06:22,760 --> 01:06:26,400
towards something else. So that's just among creatures. Transposing this

1178
01:06:26,480 --> 01:06:29,199
to God, he's going to say, okay, So, like everything

1179
01:06:29,199 --> 01:06:31,800
else in God, our arguments for divine simplicity are right.

1180
01:06:33,559 --> 01:06:36,360
The essay sign of this accident is not going to

1181
01:06:36,360 --> 01:06:40,679
be in essay. It's not going to be inherence. It's

1182
01:06:40,800 --> 01:06:45,519
just going to be the solf same divine essay. But

1183
01:06:45,920 --> 01:06:50,280
I can still talk about it's Rozzio, it's content being

1184
01:06:50,440 --> 01:07:01,599
distinct from from other relations in God, because these relations, right,

1185
01:07:01,639 --> 01:07:04,400
they're towards this is not towards the essence. They're not

1186
01:07:04,400 --> 01:07:06,480
positive something in the essence, they're not modifying, and they're

1187
01:07:06,639 --> 01:07:10,320
strictly looking outward. And so I can say that God,

1188
01:07:10,719 --> 01:07:14,920
when kind nature is two because of the Father or

1189
01:07:15,079 --> 01:07:20,320
from in the case of the Son, without actualizing, modifying, limiting,

1190
01:07:20,519 --> 01:07:23,360
or what have you, of the divine nature. And so

1191
01:07:23,480 --> 01:07:28,480
for aquittness, it's entirely principled to hold divine simplicity in

1192
01:07:28,519 --> 01:07:31,199
the sense which I just stated, namely, there can be

1193
01:07:31,239 --> 01:07:34,880
nothing in God which limits him or actualizes him, and

1194
01:07:35,119 --> 01:07:39,239
at the same time to hold three subsistent relations in

1195
01:07:39,280 --> 01:07:42,280
that divine nature. And so it's not ad hoc. It's

1196
01:07:42,280 --> 01:07:44,480
not just we're going to tack it on. It has

1197
01:07:44,519 --> 01:07:46,559
to do with what it means to talk about relations

1198
01:07:46,559 --> 01:07:47,239
in the first place.

1199
01:07:47,519 --> 01:07:50,480
Speaker 1: Yeah, I'm familiar with what he says, and the problem

1200
01:07:50,599 --> 01:07:53,760
is that it doesn't work. So, for one, the basic

1201
01:07:53,800 --> 01:07:55,639
way to repute this is just to talk about the

1202
01:07:55,639 --> 01:08:00,599
fact that this distinction is spoken of as relations of opposition.

1203
01:08:00,719 --> 01:08:03,679
And yes, Aquinas does at times try to say that

1204
01:08:03,719 --> 01:08:06,280
the Father is still the arcade of the Trinity, But

1205
01:08:06,400 --> 01:08:09,280
what he doesn't understand is that for the Eastern position,

1206
01:08:09,400 --> 01:08:14,000
which has already declined this dogmat Yeah, can you hear me?

1207
01:08:14,440 --> 01:08:16,439
Speaker 2: Hang on, I think I want to just say that again.

1208
01:08:19,000 --> 01:08:20,760
Speaker 1: Yeah, what I was trying to say is that this

1209
01:08:20,880 --> 01:08:24,239
is already defined an Orthodox theology, we already had a

1210
01:08:24,279 --> 01:08:28,199
way to understand the relations within the Trinity, precisely because

1211
01:08:28,199 --> 01:08:31,520
we didn't have the absolute divine simplicity doctrine. So we

1212
01:08:31,600 --> 01:08:34,840
already had an Eastern tradition that dealt with these issues,

1213
01:08:35,560 --> 01:08:38,760
particularly in Saint Maximus Confessor, Saint Photius and so forth,

1214
01:08:38,800 --> 01:08:42,079
who really fleshed this out on multiple levels. And that's

1215
01:08:42,119 --> 01:08:45,279
because we don't have the absolute divind simplicity problem that

1216
01:08:45,319 --> 01:08:48,119
we needed to even use relations of opposition. This does

1217
01:08:48,159 --> 01:08:50,960
not come into play until Augustine and then later on

1218
01:08:51,079 --> 01:08:53,800
picked up by Anselm an Aquinas. So the problems with

1219
01:08:53,880 --> 01:08:56,720
this idea and the way that you formulated it is

1220
01:08:56,760 --> 01:08:58,640
that I understand that Aquinas doesn't want it to be

1221
01:08:58,680 --> 01:09:01,439
just tacked on. He wants it to really be, you know,

1222
01:09:01,560 --> 01:09:05,159
three hypostases. But the problem is that when you get

1223
01:09:05,239 --> 01:09:09,720
to this question of identifying the persons with the essence,

1224
01:09:09,760 --> 01:09:13,439
which Aquinas is very dogmatic about, he says specifically that

1225
01:09:14,800 --> 01:09:17,760
na curious person. This goes contrary to the fact that

1226
01:09:17,800 --> 01:09:20,920
Saint John Damascus in on the Orthodox Faith, says very

1227
01:09:20,920 --> 01:09:24,479
clearly that the identification of nature in person is the

1228
01:09:24,560 --> 01:09:27,359
root of all heresies and that's because sat John Damascus

1229
01:09:27,479 --> 01:09:31,319
understood that all the dialectical heretics would use this as

1230
01:09:31,359 --> 01:09:36,399
this kind of dialectical relationship between thing and other one.

1231
01:09:36,439 --> 01:09:41,359
In many simplicity and differentiation, they always set up a

1232
01:09:41,399 --> 01:09:46,079
dialectical tension, and so relations of opposition are ironically or

1233
01:09:46,119 --> 01:09:51,119
the Augustinian shield is a way to define the person's dialectically.

1234
01:09:51,479 --> 01:09:54,920
The problem is that it doesn't work. For one, the

1235
01:09:54,960 --> 01:09:58,399
spirit is subordinating in this relationship because he doesn't have

1236
01:09:58,560 --> 01:10:01,319
a property that the other you have. And in fact,

1237
01:10:01,319 --> 01:10:03,800
in Roman Catholic dogma it's actually stated more than once

1238
01:10:04,319 --> 01:10:06,640
that the father and the son are together a co

1239
01:10:06,840 --> 01:10:09,640
cause of the spirit. So the father and the son

1240
01:10:09,640 --> 01:10:12,680
is sharing property that the spirit doesn't have. All of

1241
01:10:12,680 --> 01:10:15,439
this in order to maintain this system of how to

1242
01:10:15,479 --> 01:10:19,399
differentiate between persons and an absolutely simple essence again, just

1243
01:10:19,479 --> 01:10:23,039
toss out the absolutely simple essence doctrine of a quitas

1244
01:10:23,319 --> 01:10:26,159
except the Eastern doctrine, and you don't have this problem.

1245
01:10:26,520 --> 01:10:29,560
The persons are differentiated because the father is the archae

1246
01:10:29,800 --> 01:10:34,479
You unriginate the cause of the persons. The aspiration is

1247
01:10:34,600 --> 01:10:38,039
unique to the spirit, generation is unique to the son,

1248
01:10:38,760 --> 01:10:41,479
and you don't need this relation of oppositions doctrine, which

1249
01:10:41,520 --> 01:10:46,600
is a dialectical philosophical speculation approach and actually doesn't really

1250
01:10:46,600 --> 01:10:50,119
distinguish a person because in fact, every one of the

1251
01:10:50,159 --> 01:10:53,800
persons shares this relation of being not the other. Right,

1252
01:10:54,399 --> 01:10:57,119
each of the persons is not the son, is not

1253
01:10:57,159 --> 01:10:59,119
the spirit is not the spirit is not the father,

1254
01:10:59,159 --> 01:11:02,880
et cetera. So not being the other two, uh, and

1255
01:11:03,000 --> 01:11:06,079
the spirit not having a property of producing a person

1256
01:11:06,680 --> 01:11:10,600
imbalances the trinity. So the spirit ends up being subordinated.

1257
01:11:10,600 --> 01:11:13,439
And this is the chief reason why the East has

1258
01:11:13,439 --> 01:11:15,239
a problem with the Philly. Okay, So what you're talking

1259
01:11:15,279 --> 01:11:18,760
about in a way to distinguish the persons that doesn't

1260
01:11:18,760 --> 01:11:22,800
do damage to divine simplicity. Not only does it not work,

1261
01:11:22,880 --> 01:11:25,319
it's actually the root of the Philly. Okay. The Philioka

1262
01:11:25,359 --> 01:11:28,279
was introduced precisely because of this question and these issues,

1263
01:11:28,880 --> 01:11:31,439
and it just simply doesn't work, all right.

1264
01:11:31,840 --> 01:11:36,079
Speaker 2: So first off, so I'm just going to reiterate my

1265
01:11:36,119 --> 01:11:37,600
point about it appeals to authority.

1266
01:11:37,720 --> 01:11:42,199
Speaker 1: So you're you're in a Roman Catholic church, no, I know,

1267
01:11:43,640 --> 01:11:45,399
appeals to authority and name Catholic.

1268
01:11:45,880 --> 01:11:48,039
Speaker 2: I would have appreciated if you like. Later emailed me

1269
01:11:48,159 --> 01:11:52,319
the quotation you're thinking of, which one, the one about

1270
01:11:52,359 --> 01:11:56,760
the root of all heresies? That sounds fun. It's an

1271
01:11:56,800 --> 01:11:59,680
on the Orthodox faith. It's famous where you're talking about

1272
01:11:59,680 --> 01:12:05,560
Crystal the Yeah. But secondly, apart from all that, So

1273
01:12:05,640 --> 01:12:08,800
first off, so you want to go down the subordination

1274
01:12:08,840 --> 01:12:11,680
to something, it's not clear.

1275
01:12:11,439 --> 01:12:20,079
Speaker 1: To me a what you gain by or how.

1276
01:12:20,119 --> 01:12:22,520
Speaker 2: This problem is more your problem for me than it

1277
01:12:22,600 --> 01:12:26,760
is for anybody, including for yourself, because if you're going

1278
01:12:26,800 --> 01:12:31,479
to say that subordinationism just means that one person is

1279
01:12:31,520 --> 01:12:33,279
going to be subordinate to another in as much as

1280
01:12:33,279 --> 01:12:35,239
it is from another, then.

1281
01:12:36,520 --> 01:12:40,680
Speaker 1: Feeling, then you've got a problem. So I said, the

1282
01:12:40,760 --> 01:12:44,000
Roman doctrine of the father and the son together sharing

1283
01:12:44,039 --> 01:12:46,399
the property of being the co calls of the spirit

1284
01:12:46,479 --> 01:12:49,199
subordinates the spirit because the father and the shunt sons

1285
01:12:49,239 --> 01:12:52,359
share a property that the Spirit does not. So in

1286
01:12:52,439 --> 01:12:55,000
class if you read John Damascus or any Eastern Fathers

1287
01:12:55,119 --> 01:12:58,680
or what's normative, even in some Catholic theology, they will

1288
01:12:58,720 --> 01:13:01,279
make the claim that whatever we say something about God

1289
01:13:01,359 --> 01:13:04,319
to Trinity, it's either applicable to the persons or to

1290
01:13:04,359 --> 01:13:06,880
the essence. Right, So we're making a statement, either about

1291
01:13:06,880 --> 01:13:09,720
the unity of God or about the persons. There's no

1292
01:13:09,960 --> 01:13:13,399
there's no property that two persons share that the others

1293
01:13:13,520 --> 01:13:18,920
that another person doesn't have. And infhilioquism is it's defined

1294
01:13:19,039 --> 01:13:22,000
in Florence and the Roman dogmas. You have the father

1295
01:13:22,119 --> 01:13:25,680
and the son as the co cause of the hypostasis

1296
01:13:25,720 --> 01:13:28,880
of the spirit. It's not just the eternal manifestation, which

1297
01:13:28,920 --> 01:13:32,000
is what we believe about the son sharing in the

1298
01:13:32,039 --> 01:13:34,720
eternal manifestation of the spirit, the spirit rests in him.

1299
01:13:35,079 --> 01:13:36,680
But in fact, in the Roman Catholic dogma, there's I

1300
01:13:36,680 --> 01:13:38,800
don't think there's any question that it's the father and

1301
01:13:38,840 --> 01:13:41,840
the son who are the hypostatic cause of the spirit.

1302
01:13:42,239 --> 01:13:45,199
So the subordination comes by the fact that the father

1303
01:13:45,239 --> 01:13:47,520
and the son share a property that the spirit does not.

1304
01:13:48,880 --> 01:13:53,600
Speaker 2: Okay, So it's true that Aquitus will say this too much,

1305
01:13:54,199 --> 01:13:59,359
that there's four relations in God. There's going to be

1306
01:13:59,439 --> 01:14:04,960
the relation of paternity, affiliation, of spiration, and of procession.

1307
01:14:06,880 --> 01:14:09,119
And he holds up of those four and maybe this

1308
01:14:09,199 --> 01:14:12,680
is the esthetic. Uh, it's a pleasure that you're having

1309
01:14:12,680 --> 01:14:18,159
with us. Only three of those are I forget what

1310
01:14:18,159 --> 01:14:20,439
the technical term is, but only three of those correspond

1311
01:14:20,479 --> 01:14:22,960
to a person. The reason is because the fourth, namely spiration,

1312
01:14:24,119 --> 01:14:26,600
is not held in opposition.

1313
01:14:26,880 --> 01:14:27,239
Speaker 1: It's not.

1314
01:14:28,960 --> 01:14:33,640
Speaker 2: Well, it's held in common by two persons, and so

1315
01:14:33,720 --> 01:14:37,359
it doesn't serve to identify one person as as opposed

1316
01:14:37,439 --> 01:14:37,920
to another.

1317
01:14:39,600 --> 01:14:44,000
Speaker 1: Well, he uses relations of opposition and he tries to

1318
01:14:44,119 --> 01:14:48,640
use affiliation, spiration, et cetera. So so there's there's both

1319
01:14:48,640 --> 01:14:51,000
our president of Quinas and it's only in the more

1320
01:14:51,079 --> 01:14:54,560
radical philioquiz that really that relations of opposition even entered

1321
01:14:54,600 --> 01:14:56,399
as a way to do it, but it doesn't work.

1322
01:14:56,640 --> 01:14:59,119
But there is a section where he talks about relations

1323
01:14:59,119 --> 01:14:59,720
of opposition.

1324
01:15:00,159 --> 01:15:02,439
Speaker 2: Oh yeah, no, no, the relations of opposition essentral. So quin

1325
01:15:02,479 --> 01:15:05,760
it's the theory, right. My point was just sure you

1326
01:15:05,840 --> 01:15:10,119
have this aesthetic ugliness if you like that. Of the

1327
01:15:10,159 --> 01:15:13,720
four relations with the two pairs, right, So, fraternity, affiliation,

1328
01:15:13,840 --> 01:15:18,760
and procession to spiration, only three of those pick out

1329
01:15:18,800 --> 01:15:21,640
a person. And the reason is because the fourth spiration

1330
01:15:21,960 --> 01:15:25,000
is shared in common by two of itself. I'm not

1331
01:15:25,039 --> 01:15:27,960
sure why that's why that's a problem.

1332
01:15:28,039 --> 01:15:30,399
Speaker 1: If you want to does the father and the son

1333
01:15:30,600 --> 01:15:33,319
share a property that the spirit does not? In anything

1334
01:15:33,359 --> 01:15:35,520
that you say about God is applicable either to the

1335
01:15:35,560 --> 01:15:36,800
persons or to the nature.

1336
01:15:37,439 --> 01:15:41,079
Speaker 2: Okay, So by your theory, don't the son and the

1337
01:15:41,079 --> 01:15:43,319
spirit both share a property which the Father does not.

1338
01:15:45,359 --> 01:15:51,600
Speaker 1: No being from, No, because because the way that they're

1339
01:15:51,600 --> 01:15:53,920
defined is not merely being from the way they're defined

1340
01:15:54,000 --> 01:16:01,920
is hypostatic origin. Generation defines the son, spiration defines the spirit,

1341
01:16:02,000 --> 01:16:03,359
and the Father is the sole cause.

1342
01:16:04,880 --> 01:16:11,560
Speaker 2: Okay, and so okay, But so it seems so you see,

1343
01:16:12,359 --> 01:16:14,640
I'm trying to forguret where to start here. So it

1344
01:16:14,680 --> 01:16:16,640
seems as though I could say in reply, right, so

1345
01:16:16,800 --> 01:16:19,159
what you've got there is they've got they both share

1346
01:16:19,159 --> 01:16:22,039
this property of being from, and one of them is

1347
01:16:22,119 --> 01:16:26,640
from in this way, which is being generated sonship, and

1348
01:16:26,680 --> 01:16:28,840
one of them is being from in this way, which

1349
01:16:28,920 --> 01:16:33,039
is being spiratd or proceeding or whatever. But it seems

1350
01:16:33,079 --> 01:16:34,920
as though I can say the exact same thing with

1351
01:16:35,000 --> 01:16:37,399
regards to spiration, right, because I can say that the

1352
01:16:37,399 --> 01:16:41,520
son aspirates the spirit as from the Father, and I

1353
01:16:41,560 --> 01:16:44,960
can say that the Father inspireates the spirit, not as from.

1354
01:16:45,239 --> 01:16:48,399
And so although sure there's a verbal similarity at the

1355
01:16:48,479 --> 01:16:53,239
level of abstraction, the reality is there's no like actual,

1356
01:16:53,560 --> 01:16:57,560
real relation which father and son both have, which the

1357
01:16:57,600 --> 01:16:58,359
spirit doesn't.

1358
01:17:00,159 --> 01:17:02,920
Speaker 1: But in the Roman dogma they're defined as a co cause.

1359
01:17:03,199 --> 01:17:04,399
Father and son are.

1360
01:17:04,479 --> 01:17:09,960
Speaker 2: Hypostatically no person is caused by any other.

1361
01:17:10,880 --> 01:17:13,640
Speaker 1: Of course, they are cause.

1362
01:17:14,479 --> 01:17:16,119
Speaker 2: The cause means to receive it being. I don't think

1363
01:17:16,159 --> 01:17:18,439
you want to say that.

1364
01:17:18,000 --> 01:17:22,359
Speaker 1: This is typical Orthodox and Church father terminology. The father

1365
01:17:22,479 --> 01:17:26,439
is the sole cause. Even a quantus uses this terminology.

1366
01:17:27,760 --> 01:17:30,560
Speaker 2: So again, it just depends on what you mean by cause.

1367
01:17:30,640 --> 01:17:30,720
Speaker 1: Right.

1368
01:17:30,720 --> 01:17:34,119
Speaker 2: It's if by cause you mean something which makes something else,

1369
01:17:34,399 --> 01:17:37,159
obviously not normally when.

1370
01:17:37,560 --> 01:17:40,520
Speaker 1: It's in your own dogmas that the father and the

1371
01:17:40,520 --> 01:17:43,720
son are the co cause of the spirits hypostasis.

1372
01:17:46,159 --> 01:17:49,840
Speaker 2: Yeah, if you want to send me footnotes, you want

1373
01:17:49,840 --> 01:17:58,840
me to read the dogma to you the footnote. But

1374
01:17:59,319 --> 01:18:01,199
when I'm trying to do right now is just the

1375
01:18:01,279 --> 01:18:04,039
sentiquent position as I understand it, And to my knowledge,

1376
01:18:04,159 --> 01:18:07,000
he's never going to say that the father causes the son.

1377
01:18:07,000 --> 01:18:09,000
He's going to say that the father generates the son,

1378
01:18:09,359 --> 01:18:11,279
is going to say that the son has the divine

1379
01:18:11,359 --> 01:18:15,439
nature as from the father. He's a very precise, and

1380
01:18:15,600 --> 01:18:16,000
I think.

1381
01:18:18,079 --> 01:18:20,279
Speaker 1: The term cause is used. They don't mean it in

1382
01:18:20,319 --> 01:18:24,159
the sense of creating. It's just a it's just termin it's.

1383
01:18:24,119 --> 01:18:28,039
Speaker 2: Used as synonymous for XS from WY. That's fine.

1384
01:18:29,119 --> 01:18:32,159
Speaker 1: Well, that's how it's used patristically, so they're not saying

1385
01:18:32,560 --> 01:18:38,479
and many church fathers use this terminology. Again, it's in Florence. Uh,

1386
01:18:39,319 --> 01:18:42,119
the father and the son are a co cause I'm

1387
01:18:42,119 --> 01:18:46,000
looking for the other. I think it's lateran it talks

1388
01:18:46,039 --> 01:18:48,399
about I'll give you the Denzinger here in a second.

1389
01:18:48,439 --> 01:18:51,760
But but again, the point is that that in the

1390
01:18:52,000 --> 01:18:56,079
you have a balanced position in the East where you

1391
01:18:56,159 --> 01:19:00,520
don't have attributes of properties that that two have. And

1392
01:19:00,600 --> 01:19:05,319
saying from from a source is not an attribute because

1393
01:19:05,319 --> 01:19:07,960
it's it's not a positive relation. It's a negative relation.

1394
01:19:08,079 --> 01:19:11,319
That doesn't that doesn't express anything that's part of that

1395
01:19:11,359 --> 01:19:15,800
relation of opposition. We don't we don't do relations of opposition.

1396
01:19:15,920 --> 01:19:19,159
We do hypostatic origin as the way to understand the trinity.

1397
01:19:19,800 --> 01:19:23,439
And since the Father alone is the sole cause or

1398
01:19:23,520 --> 01:19:27,399
arcade of the trinity, he's the unoriginate one. The only

1399
01:19:27,479 --> 01:19:31,319
way to distinguish the person's is by hypostatic origins, by

1400
01:19:31,359 --> 01:19:33,800
the fact that the son is generated and the spirit

1401
01:19:33,880 --> 01:19:34,840
eternally proceeds.

1402
01:19:35,439 --> 01:19:37,439
Speaker 2: So how do you distinguish what it means to be

1403
01:19:37,479 --> 01:19:39,199
generated and what it means to be proceeded.

1404
01:19:39,640 --> 01:19:42,119
Speaker 1: I will tell you what every single Eastern father says

1405
01:19:42,119 --> 01:19:44,000
to that very question, which is that we don't know

1406
01:19:44,079 --> 01:19:44,960
what those words mean.

1407
01:19:46,600 --> 01:19:54,560
Speaker 2: Okay, But what Acquinance is trying to do is to

1408
01:19:54,600 --> 01:19:58,479
give a principled reason for why these two should not

1409
01:19:58,520 --> 01:20:03,199
collapse into each other. Right, And it seems as if

1410
01:20:03,199 --> 01:20:07,880
that's something valuable today. Just to go back to the

1411
01:20:07,880 --> 01:20:10,600
subordination as something again, it's just not clear to me.

1412
01:20:15,079 --> 01:20:19,239
It's not clear to me why by saying that the

1413
01:20:19,319 --> 01:20:23,399
father is strictly two, by saying that the son is

1414
01:20:23,439 --> 01:20:27,800
both from end to and saying that the spirit is

1415
01:20:27,800 --> 01:20:31,319
strictly from It's not clear to me why I am

1416
01:20:31,399 --> 01:20:35,279
saying that one of these is like better or nobler

1417
01:20:35,359 --> 01:20:38,680
or higher than the other. Right, Because and Iquanas does

1418
01:20:38,680 --> 01:20:42,880
discuss this objection, and his point is simply that when

1419
01:20:42,880 --> 01:20:46,840
you're talking about nobility, if the nobility comes strictly from

1420
01:20:46,960 --> 01:20:49,560
the difine essence, that's something absolute and that's shared equally

1421
01:20:49,600 --> 01:20:54,520
by all. To speak of from and to or from

1422
01:20:54,600 --> 01:20:57,479
end too, is not to speak in the language of

1423
01:20:58,079 --> 01:21:01,159
better or worse, more primary or secondary.

1424
01:21:03,000 --> 01:21:06,439
Speaker 1: The idea of subordination doesn't have to do necessarily. We're

1425
01:21:06,479 --> 01:21:11,840
just defining what is less and more noble. What do

1426
01:21:11,880 --> 01:21:14,920
you mean by subordin? What is it that you see

1427
01:21:14,960 --> 01:21:17,760
as the problem with what you're calling subordination? And what

1428
01:21:17,960 --> 01:21:23,720
and how do you define it? That again, in our tridology,

1429
01:21:23,840 --> 01:21:27,439
which I again would argue is from the Eastern fathers

1430
01:21:27,439 --> 01:21:31,800
and councils and not just like my speculation, our triology

1431
01:21:31,880 --> 01:21:37,119
doesn't argue that that we can say anything about God

1432
01:21:37,159 --> 01:21:41,039
that isn't applicable to hypostasis or to God considered as

1433
01:21:41,560 --> 01:21:45,079
unity right to one God. So if we say wisdom,

1434
01:21:45,399 --> 01:21:48,439
wisdom is a property or attribute that is applicable to

1435
01:21:48,520 --> 01:21:51,479
all the persons. Right, So it's not like the Father

1436
01:21:51,600 --> 01:21:53,800
alone has wisdom and the spirit doesn't. Right, So that's

1437
01:21:53,800 --> 01:21:57,920
a that's a statement about God considered as God. It's

1438
01:21:57,960 --> 01:22:01,560
applicable to all the persons because because wisdom is a

1439
01:22:03,039 --> 01:22:06,479
wisdom is a natural attribute. It's a property or an

1440
01:22:06,479 --> 01:22:10,079
attribute applicable to nature. So likewise, when we say that

1441
01:22:10,319 --> 01:22:12,720
we consider the will of God, does God have three

1442
01:22:12,760 --> 01:22:15,039
wills or one will? God has one will? Because will

1443
01:22:15,119 --> 01:22:17,880
is a property of nature and not a property of hypostasis,

1444
01:22:18,199 --> 01:22:20,920
and for us, this is applicable to anything that's said

1445
01:22:20,960 --> 01:22:23,359
about God. So when we even when we talk about

1446
01:22:23,399 --> 01:22:27,279
trinitarian relations, when we talk about how we distinguish the persons,

1447
01:22:27,319 --> 01:22:30,000
we distinguish them by their origin, by the fact that

1448
01:22:30,039 --> 01:22:32,840
the Father alone is the fact that you have a

1449
01:22:32,920 --> 01:22:36,439
problem with the Father soul ark or cause, I think

1450
01:22:36,520 --> 01:22:40,560
shows a lack of understanding of what the Eastern fathers

1451
01:22:40,600 --> 01:22:42,560
say when they define the Father as the cause.

1452
01:22:42,880 --> 01:22:47,359
Speaker 2: So for us, what you mean by a cause is

1453
01:22:47,439 --> 01:22:50,439
just I think what I meant by what I meant,

1454
01:22:52,399 --> 01:22:54,680
we're just talking about the relations of origin.

1455
01:22:55,319 --> 01:22:57,760
Speaker 1: That's fine, okay, okay, But but for us, it's not

1456
01:22:57,920 --> 01:23:00,760
just a question of speculating about the trinity. For us,

1457
01:23:00,760 --> 01:23:03,119
this is how we know God. God is known first

1458
01:23:03,119 --> 01:23:06,720
and foremost, as Paul says, one Father. So God reveals

1459
01:23:06,760 --> 01:23:09,960
himself to us hypostatically or personally. We don't start with

1460
01:23:10,079 --> 01:23:13,760
reasoning back and coming up when they first cause simple essence.

1461
01:23:13,760 --> 01:23:15,840
We start with the fact that God says, I am

1462
01:23:15,920 --> 01:23:22,760
heat God is personal. We start our order theology is

1463
01:23:22,800 --> 01:23:25,319
different or order theology right. We start with the Father

1464
01:23:25,880 --> 01:23:29,920
and the Father as the sole cause or arka A. R. H.

1465
01:23:30,119 --> 01:23:33,760
In the Greek as Basil uses, it is the cause

1466
01:23:33,920 --> 01:23:36,880
of the son in terms of generation, and he's the

1467
01:23:36,920 --> 01:23:40,520
cause of the spirit eternally in terms of spiration. And

1468
01:23:40,600 --> 01:23:44,239
so that alone is the way that we distinguish the person.

1469
01:23:44,319 --> 01:23:46,640
There's no other way. So anytime we make a statement

1470
01:23:46,680 --> 01:23:49,319
about God, when we say how do we know who

1471
01:23:49,359 --> 01:23:52,279
the spirit is? We say, he proceeds eternally from the

1472
01:23:52,279 --> 01:23:55,239
Father through the son. And when we say who is

1473
01:23:55,239 --> 01:23:57,880
the son, he's the one. He is eternally generated from

1474
01:23:57,880 --> 01:24:01,359
the Father and eternally manifest us the spirit. Right, So

1475
01:24:01,439 --> 01:24:04,119
those are the ways that we distinguished And anything said

1476
01:24:04,119 --> 01:24:08,439
about God and our trinitarian theology causes imbalance. If we

1477
01:24:08,520 --> 01:24:12,479
attribute a property, a positive property to two persons, that

1478
01:24:12,600 --> 01:24:15,960
one of them doesn't have the spirit therefore lacks and

1479
01:24:16,039 --> 01:24:19,439
the ability to produce a person, and this and and

1480
01:24:19,760 --> 01:24:22,439
in other words, the Father and the Son have this

1481
01:24:22,439 --> 01:24:26,039
this melded kind of co cause here to use the

1482
01:24:26,439 --> 01:24:29,000
terminology of Florence, and I think the latter and council. Again,

1483
01:24:29,239 --> 01:24:31,520
I'm going for a memory here, but it is a

1484
01:24:31,600 --> 01:24:34,159
It is a father and the Son together signify a

1485
01:24:34,199 --> 01:24:39,760
single principle of the spirit. To use the terminology. Yes.

1486
01:24:40,199 --> 01:24:42,479
Speaker 2: The reason I'm having trouble with this argument is that

1487
01:24:42,520 --> 01:24:46,079
it's just not clear to me what what is so

1488
01:24:46,239 --> 01:24:49,319
dire about the saying that this.

1489
01:24:49,279 --> 01:24:52,680
Speaker 1: Is because nothing that's said of God it doesn't produce.

1490
01:24:52,760 --> 01:24:58,000
And when you say things about or a new person

1491
01:24:58,039 --> 01:24:58,640
the others too.

1492
01:24:59,199 --> 01:25:03,279
Speaker 2: The other two are because you're you're happy with saying.

1493
01:25:02,359 --> 01:25:05,840
Speaker 1: You can actually you can. You can see the subordination

1494
01:25:05,920 --> 01:25:07,359
of the spirit of the Roman Church over the last

1495
01:25:07,359 --> 01:25:12,039
several hundred years. The Spirit is not given his proper role. Uh.

1496
01:25:12,079 --> 01:25:14,319
And this is why you think that you know, I mean,

1497
01:25:14,319 --> 01:25:15,600
this is I'm not trying to get off on a trail,

1498
01:25:15,600 --> 01:25:17,640
but the Roman Church thinks that you need the payments to,

1499
01:25:17,720 --> 01:25:20,399
you know, settle all issues. Because the idea of Pentecosts

1500
01:25:20,479 --> 01:25:25,319
actually guiding the Spirit guiding the actual churches is is suppressed.

1501
01:25:25,479 --> 01:25:27,159
It leads to the idea of why we need a

1502
01:25:27,199 --> 01:25:30,600
pope because you don't understand the meaning of Pentecost and

1503
01:25:30,600 --> 01:25:33,279
the reality of the spirit. The Spirit is just as divine.

1504
01:25:33,600 --> 01:25:36,239
He's not lacked, he's not lacking in the ability.

1505
01:25:36,479 --> 01:25:38,359
Speaker 2: You don't need to convince me that the Holy Spirit

1506
01:25:38,439 --> 01:25:42,039
is divine. All. I'm all I'm doing is I would

1507
01:25:42,039 --> 01:25:46,600
want to deny firmly that being toward another person as

1508
01:25:46,880 --> 01:25:50,079
towards rather than from, is somehow essential to being a

1509
01:25:50,119 --> 01:25:50,680
divine person.

1510
01:25:50,760 --> 01:25:52,439
Speaker 1: I don't think he doesn't produce.

1511
01:25:53,439 --> 01:25:56,840
Speaker 2: I do think that following down the filioqui trail is

1512
01:25:56,880 --> 01:25:58,560
a bit of a rabbit hole at the moment.

1513
01:25:58,800 --> 01:26:03,640
Speaker 1: Right, So related Philly is a result of absolutely.

1514
01:26:03,600 --> 01:26:07,000
Speaker 2: I understand that. So you're saying that it's a this

1515
01:26:07,079 --> 01:26:12,840
clinching argument against divine simplicity, that divine simplicity entails the bunk,

1516
01:26:13,199 --> 01:26:15,159
and that it's not going to work for me, because

1517
01:26:15,159 --> 01:26:17,960
I don't think the is bunk unless it seems perfectly

1518
01:26:18,039 --> 01:26:20,199
legit to hold divine simplicity. So, if you want to

1519
01:26:20,279 --> 01:26:22,960
argue against h the argument that I was giving.

1520
01:26:22,760 --> 01:26:25,279
Speaker 1: Before, the father and the son are a co cause

1521
01:26:25,399 --> 01:26:29,920
or a co principle together the spirit, the spirit does

1522
01:26:29,960 --> 01:26:34,560
not have this property of producing a person. Yeah, that

1523
01:26:34,720 --> 01:26:37,399
is subordination. So he's lacking in a property that the

1524
01:26:37,439 --> 01:26:38,199
other two share.

1525
01:26:39,640 --> 01:26:41,039
Speaker 2: Yeah, but I mean you could say the same thing

1526
01:26:41,039 --> 01:26:45,319
about the right. So I don't see why that's any

1527
01:26:45,359 --> 01:26:51,439
more problem classic because the father is that doesn't mean

1528
01:26:51,439 --> 01:26:53,119
that the father is like better.

1529
01:26:54,119 --> 01:26:56,000
Speaker 1: No, you're not you're not getting the point that for

1530
01:26:56,079 --> 01:26:58,520
the first thousand years it was normative to say that

1531
01:26:58,640 --> 01:27:01,399
anything that we say about God's applicable to either the

1532
01:27:01,439 --> 01:27:04,640
persons all all of them, or to the nature, or

1533
01:27:04,680 --> 01:27:07,000
to the hy or or to them individually. So there

1534
01:27:07,000 --> 01:27:10,119
can't be something that to share that one doesn't that

1535
01:27:10,359 --> 01:27:15,359
produces the imbalance. There's only one cause.

1536
01:27:15,159 --> 01:27:18,640
Speaker 2: Of seeing the connection between those two claims. There's also

1537
01:27:20,279 --> 01:27:22,479
everything which is predicated.

1538
01:27:22,000 --> 01:27:24,880
Speaker 1: Only one ark in the trinity, and it is the Father,

1539
01:27:25,199 --> 01:27:27,720
and the Son does not share in his ark, in

1540
01:27:27,800 --> 01:27:32,399
his hypostatic property. Billyoquism makes the son share in what

1541
01:27:32,560 --> 01:27:35,640
makes the Father distinct, namely being the unoriginal cause of

1542
01:27:35,680 --> 01:27:36,399
the of the Godhead.

1543
01:27:38,079 --> 01:27:40,279
Speaker 2: Yes, I mean, you're not gonna like this, right, but

1544
01:27:41,079 --> 01:27:44,520
the stimistic answer to that part of the problem is

1545
01:27:44,560 --> 01:27:48,800
going to be what makes the Father be the Father, right,

1546
01:27:49,039 --> 01:27:52,680
is the generating of the Son in the act of knowledge,

1547
01:27:52,680 --> 01:27:56,239
which is this diadic thing. And then what makes the

1548
01:27:56,239 --> 01:27:58,920
Holy Spirit be the Holy Spirit is the fact that

1549
01:27:58,960 --> 01:28:01,920
it results from the love of the two right.

1550
01:28:01,960 --> 01:28:05,000
Speaker 1: So again this is why you use the same argument

1551
01:28:05,039 --> 01:28:08,039
that the Arians used, that that the Holy Spirit is

1552
01:28:08,039 --> 01:28:10,319
a product of the will of the Father and the son.

1553
01:28:11,159 --> 01:28:13,239
This is also the exact same argument.

1554
01:28:13,880 --> 01:28:17,119
Speaker 2: I'm aware that you don't like the psychological analogy, but again,

1555
01:28:17,680 --> 01:28:18,279
can we keep the.

1556
01:28:18,520 --> 01:28:23,479
Speaker 1: No because because this is important because listen, Sat Gregory

1557
01:28:23,520 --> 01:28:27,239
Poms uses the psychological analogy, but he applies it to

1558
01:28:27,319 --> 01:28:30,920
eternal manifestation, and when he critiques the Filioc way, he says,

1559
01:28:30,960 --> 01:28:36,520
the Romans are confused because they mistake mission for hyposthetic origin,

1560
01:28:36,600 --> 01:28:40,760
and they also mistake eternal manifestation for hyposthetic origin. So

1561
01:28:40,800 --> 01:28:42,640
that's why I began the talk when I mentioned Saint

1562
01:28:42,680 --> 01:28:46,119
John Demascus talking about eternal manifestation of the spirit. It's

1563
01:28:46,199 --> 01:28:48,960
not hyposthetic origin. It's it's John of the Mascus who

1564
01:28:49,000 --> 01:28:53,399
makes that point in that distinction. And what's not hypothetic origin? Mhm,

1565
01:28:53,960 --> 01:28:57,479
what's a lot hyposthetic origin? What we were just talking

1566
01:28:57,479 --> 01:29:00,960
about with the Holy Spirit? Uh, the psycle logical analogy

1567
01:29:01,000 --> 01:29:04,279
that you used, right, this is from Augustine and it's

1568
01:29:04,279 --> 01:29:06,159
in you're saying.

1569
01:29:05,960 --> 01:29:08,279
Speaker 2: That it's not the hypostatic origin. That's a claim. I

1570
01:29:08,359 --> 01:29:08,760
deny it.

1571
01:29:08,880 --> 01:29:13,079
Speaker 1: What's your argument because it doesn't work because the son

1572
01:29:13,199 --> 01:29:16,279
takes on a property of the son, takes on the

1573
01:29:16,399 --> 01:29:18,760
very thing that defines the father which is to be

1574
01:29:18,920 --> 01:29:19,760
the sole archade.

1575
01:29:20,439 --> 01:29:23,239
Speaker 2: No, what defines the fathers to be, according to Kunas

1576
01:29:23,640 --> 01:29:29,319
is to be right, to not be from what definess

1577
01:29:29,319 --> 01:29:32,039
of opposition. And I said earlier that doesn't work because

1578
01:29:32,079 --> 01:29:37,119
the other two are not from which you admitted. I

1579
01:29:37,159 --> 01:29:44,439
can go over the text again, let's see, But okay,

1580
01:29:45,600 --> 01:29:47,960
we've got we can keep on going and feel the

1581
01:29:47,960 --> 01:29:48,960
oquay trail if you like.

1582
01:29:49,840 --> 01:29:51,319
Speaker 1: Let let's put it this way. Let's put it this way.

1583
01:29:51,359 --> 01:29:53,359
If you read on the Orthodox Faith, which of course

1584
01:29:53,359 --> 01:29:57,399
Aquinas you know, references many many times, you will find

1585
01:29:57,479 --> 01:30:00,960
that everything that I'm saying and claiming is one hundred

1586
01:30:00,960 --> 01:30:03,760
percent in line with what sam JOHNA. Mascus is arguing.

1587
01:30:03,880 --> 01:30:05,720
And my point is just to say that.

1588
01:30:05,640 --> 01:30:08,159
Speaker 2: There may not be that's not really not concerned.

1589
01:30:08,159 --> 01:30:11,319
Speaker 1: But okay, I'm telling you to read it because you'll

1590
01:30:11,319 --> 01:30:15,279
find my arguments are all from that and other Orthodox writers.

1591
01:30:15,399 --> 01:30:18,159
So I'm not making arguments that are like out of

1592
01:30:18,159 --> 01:30:22,960
my head. They're actually from maybe somebody that you would

1593
01:30:23,000 --> 01:30:28,279
find worth reading useful right for the sake of future dialogue.

1594
01:30:28,279 --> 01:30:30,720
I'm saying, if you read that, you'll see all my

1595
01:30:30,840 --> 01:30:33,840
arguments are there would happily.

1596
01:30:34,039 --> 01:30:36,479
Speaker 2: I think the opportunity to read Saint John and the.

1597
01:30:36,479 --> 01:30:42,239
Speaker 1: Roman Church affirms that, right, So that affirms what he's

1598
01:30:42,279 --> 01:30:44,000
a doctor of the church in aquas.

1599
01:30:44,159 --> 01:30:48,520
Speaker 2: Yeah, the doctor of the church is not to affirm

1600
01:30:48,560 --> 01:30:50,720
everything that they that they say it's true, of course, but.

1601
01:30:50,760 --> 01:30:53,399
Speaker 1: I'm saying that true because he said it. I'm saying

1602
01:30:53,439 --> 01:30:56,039
that the arguments are there and for future reference, you

1603
01:30:56,079 --> 01:30:58,520
would if you want to understand where I'm getting all this,

1604
01:30:58,600 --> 01:30:59,159
it's from there.

1605
01:30:59,319 --> 01:31:03,800
Speaker 2: Sure well, no, I appreciate that. But again, so just

1606
01:31:03,840 --> 01:31:06,960
to recap what got us there, right, So, you're saying

1607
01:31:08,840 --> 01:31:13,279
that divine simplicity is irreconcilable with the Trinity, because the

1608
01:31:13,279 --> 01:31:15,880
only way that's uh that you can reconcile it with

1609
01:31:15,880 --> 01:31:20,560
the Trinity is by subordinationism. I'm not convinced we can

1610
01:31:20,600 --> 01:31:22,399
have we can keep on having that argument if you

1611
01:31:22,439 --> 01:31:23,520
think that's the lynchpin.

1612
01:31:24,239 --> 01:31:26,960
Speaker 1: But you understand what I'm saying though. What the problem

1613
01:31:27,079 --> 01:31:29,319
is that you don't understand our position in terms of

1614
01:31:29,399 --> 01:31:33,399
hypostatic origins. Is the only way to explain who God is.

1615
01:31:33,439 --> 01:31:35,439
I mean, even the idea of the Father being the

1616
01:31:36,079 --> 01:31:38,479
cause is foreign to you, and it's common in the

1617
01:31:38,479 --> 01:31:39,319
Eastern fathers.

1618
01:31:39,880 --> 01:31:42,840
Speaker 2: Uh So I was inexplicable, right, because I asked you

1619
01:31:42,920 --> 01:31:47,319
what procession means as distinct from filiation, and you said

1620
01:31:47,319 --> 01:31:48,880
that that's in principle unanswerable.

1621
01:31:49,600 --> 01:31:51,520
Speaker 1: And that's the answer of all the Eastern Fathers, and

1622
01:31:51,520 --> 01:31:53,840
even Augustine says that we don't even know exactly what

1623
01:31:53,880 --> 01:31:54,600
these words mean.

1624
01:31:55,319 --> 01:31:57,680
Speaker 2: We have to exactly what these words mean. But I'm

1625
01:31:57,680 --> 01:32:00,920
asking you to give me some way in which, in

1626
01:32:00,920 --> 01:32:03,720
an imperfect we can distinguish these things.

1627
01:32:04,319 --> 01:32:07,680
Speaker 1: I mean, we don't know how to define it. We

1628
01:32:07,720 --> 01:32:09,720
don't know how to procession, We don't know how to

1629
01:32:09,760 --> 01:32:12,840
find eternal generation and why these two things are different.

1630
01:32:12,880 --> 01:32:15,399
But they are. And if you read the next several

1631
01:32:15,520 --> 01:32:18,560
hundred centuries after Augustine of debate on this very question,

1632
01:32:18,800 --> 01:32:21,720
what you come to find out is that the way

1633
01:32:21,920 --> 01:32:24,560
that we distinguish the person's is different from the way

1634
01:32:24,680 --> 01:32:26,439
Rome tries to do it. Rome tries to do it

1635
01:32:26,439 --> 01:32:30,600
within a context of also accepting absolutely divide simplicity. We don't.

1636
01:32:31,079 --> 01:32:35,079
And because we don't, we have the Father defined by

1637
01:32:35,239 --> 01:32:37,920
his role as archae or soul, origin or cause of

1638
01:32:37,920 --> 01:32:42,199
the Godhead. That means that that for him to retain

1639
01:32:42,359 --> 01:32:46,399
his his hypostasis. He doesn't share that property of being

1640
01:32:46,399 --> 01:32:49,640
the cause with anyone else. So that's why the son

1641
01:32:49,800 --> 01:32:53,000
can't take on. Listen, that's why the son can't take

1642
01:32:53,039 --> 01:32:56,880
on what is his defining hypostatic term.

1643
01:32:57,479 --> 01:33:00,239
Speaker 2: I understand that and the issues that we're taking two

1644
01:33:00,239 --> 01:33:04,159
different things as being the defining note of the father.

1645
01:33:04,279 --> 01:33:04,399
Speaker 1: Right.

1646
01:33:04,399 --> 01:33:07,840
Speaker 2: So I'm looking right now at Dave Potentia uh nine

1647
01:33:07,800 --> 01:33:12,319
to nine, which is on whether there are only three

1648
01:33:12,359 --> 01:33:13,520
persons of God?

1649
01:33:17,359 --> 01:33:30,479
Speaker 1: Hello? Hello, what looks like we lost Hell being not born?

1650
01:33:31,439 --> 01:33:33,199
Are you there in my computers?

1651
01:33:33,199 --> 01:33:40,000
Speaker 2: Having I'm looking right now at the Potensia nine nine,

1652
01:33:40,000 --> 01:33:42,720
which I think is aquinance, is the fullest explanation of

1653
01:33:42,760 --> 01:33:46,560
how he thinks the of the three persons are distinguished

1654
01:33:46,600 --> 01:33:47,039
from each other.

1655
01:33:47,720 --> 01:33:48,520
Speaker 1: I could be wrong.

1656
01:33:48,319 --> 01:33:52,039
Speaker 2: About that, but so what he takes is the defining

1657
01:33:52,119 --> 01:33:55,720
attribute of the father is not being cause of the others,

1658
01:33:55,720 --> 01:33:57,520
which is what you are taking that right, So I

1659
01:33:57,560 --> 01:34:00,479
grant you right. If you're gonna say that the person,

1660
01:34:02,720 --> 01:34:04,760
then the father and the and the son would collapse

1661
01:34:04,800 --> 01:34:06,760
into each other on the fil right.

1662
01:34:08,119 --> 01:34:11,199
Speaker 1: The son which defines the father.

1663
01:34:11,840 --> 01:34:16,960
Speaker 2: Rather, what defines the father is being, which in other words,

1664
01:34:17,000 --> 01:34:19,960
means to not be born, right, so to not be

1665
01:34:20,039 --> 01:34:24,520
from a cause. And that's not true if either father

1666
01:34:24,800 --> 01:34:27,600
or son. And so it seems as that problem that

1667
01:34:27,640 --> 01:34:30,399
you were just worried about, Uh, just depends on what

1668
01:34:30,439 --> 01:34:31,640
you choose as the.

1669
01:34:33,119 --> 01:34:36,640
Speaker 1: No. I I recognize that Aquinas has a place for

1670
01:34:36,640 --> 01:34:40,000
for forgiving the father that role. That's not what the

1671
01:34:40,000 --> 01:34:43,399
contention is. The contention is that when when we see

1672
01:34:43,439 --> 01:34:48,000
that as the father's only define main defining property, that the.

1673
01:34:47,880 --> 01:34:54,560
Speaker 2: Son or being the cause of another, that.

1674
01:34:54,439 --> 01:34:58,479
Speaker 1: He is unriginate and the soul. Hey, godhead, this is

1675
01:34:58,560 --> 01:35:01,159
again the classical terminal to who the father is. And

1676
01:35:01,279 --> 01:35:04,239
Basil and Greg renounci Azus and Gregoranissa and in the

1677
01:35:04,279 --> 01:35:09,960
councils uh that that can't be something that the that

1678
01:35:10,000 --> 01:35:13,000
the son shares in. Okay, and the son shares in

1679
01:35:13,039 --> 01:35:16,680
that if he becomes also the cause of the spirit, there's.

1680
01:35:16,479 --> 01:35:22,079
Speaker 2: No you take the defining attribute of the father, right,

1681
01:35:22,079 --> 01:35:25,039
So if you take the defining attribute of the father

1682
01:35:25,119 --> 01:35:29,600
as being the cause of a person more cause, I

1683
01:35:29,600 --> 01:35:35,600
mean like the originating toward and yeah, then there would

1684
01:35:35,600 --> 01:35:38,119
be two fathers and that's what you're trying to avoid.

1685
01:35:38,880 --> 01:35:41,840
But if you simply take the father to be that

1686
01:35:41,880 --> 01:35:45,319
which is, which does not proceed, which is not from another,

1687
01:35:45,439 --> 01:35:46,960
then there's only one, and I'm not sure what the

1688
01:35:47,000 --> 01:35:47,479
problem is.

1689
01:35:48,840 --> 01:35:51,000
Speaker 1: That's just another way of saying that he is the

1690
01:35:51,000 --> 01:35:57,239
sole cause of the Godhead. He's not from another. Okay,

1691
01:35:57,720 --> 01:35:59,640
the other two are from another. Right, So this is

1692
01:35:59,640 --> 01:36:02,680
really of opposition. And again I'm trying to tell you

1693
01:36:02,720 --> 01:36:05,600
that that doesn't work as a negative definition of who

1694
01:36:05,640 --> 01:36:09,600
these people are. Who excuse me, hypostasies are from these persons.

1695
01:36:09,680 --> 01:36:17,720
Speaker 2: Yes, yeah, again, I'm not sure what I lose by

1696
01:36:17,760 --> 01:36:20,800
saying that he is that which is by taking the

1697
01:36:20,840 --> 01:36:24,640
Father as that which is who gives and does not receive,

1698
01:36:25,279 --> 01:36:28,159
taking the Son and he who gives and receives, and

1699
01:36:28,199 --> 01:36:32,000
taking the Holy Spirit as he who receives. Right, like

1700
01:36:32,199 --> 01:36:35,960
that seems to distinguish all three quite nicely. You can

1701
01:36:36,000 --> 01:36:39,359
say like that receiving is common to son and spirit.

1702
01:36:39,560 --> 01:36:41,560
You can say if you like that giving is common

1703
01:36:41,600 --> 01:36:44,039
to father and son. But these are different kinds of giving,

1704
01:36:44,079 --> 01:36:46,000
in their different kinds of receivings, just like you said.

1705
01:36:46,039 --> 01:36:49,760
Speaker 1: Right, So Aquanas talks about sometimes the Roman categorich we'll

1706
01:36:49,760 --> 01:36:52,119
talk about the Father is the principal source of the

1707
01:36:52,119 --> 01:36:56,079
Godhead and then the son as a secondary source when

1708
01:36:56,119 --> 01:36:58,960
we talk about the spiration, and what we say is

1709
01:36:59,000 --> 01:37:03,720
that that's impossible because number one, the son can't participate

1710
01:37:03,800 --> 01:37:08,199
in the father's hypostasis, and number two, it gives two

1711
01:37:08,279 --> 01:37:11,159
persons a positive property that the spirit doesn't have.

1712
01:37:13,920 --> 01:37:17,039
Speaker 2: So I get what you're saying. What I'm just going

1713
01:37:17,079 --> 01:37:21,359
to argue what I was saying, which is I don't

1714
01:37:21,399 --> 01:37:23,600
think I'm well, let me say it a different way.

1715
01:37:23,720 --> 01:37:27,199
I don't think I'm giving any of the persons a

1716
01:37:27,279 --> 01:37:30,199
real positive property something which exists.

1717
01:37:30,640 --> 01:37:33,680
Speaker 1: Uh, the Father and the son produced the spirit.

1718
01:37:34,520 --> 01:37:37,640
Speaker 2: Yes, right, this is the common medication.

1719
01:37:38,079 --> 01:37:40,439
Speaker 1: That's a real positive property that the spirit doesn't have.

1720
01:37:43,399 --> 01:37:46,760
Speaker 2: So maybe this is getting into the problems of divine

1721
01:37:46,760 --> 01:37:50,960
predication or just the problems of predication in general. So

1722
01:37:50,960 --> 01:37:52,520
what a client is going to claim is that not

1723
01:37:52,640 --> 01:37:55,560
all of your just the fact that you can use

1724
01:37:55,600 --> 01:37:58,840
the same word for something, it doesn't mean that there

1725
01:37:58,960 --> 01:38:03,199
is in both cases the same reality corresponding isomorphically to

1726
01:38:03,239 --> 01:38:03,640
your word.

1727
01:38:03,960 --> 01:38:04,079
Speaker 1: Right.

1728
01:38:04,119 --> 01:38:06,520
Speaker 2: So quint is this going to say that there's two

1729
01:38:07,640 --> 01:38:11,279
relations in the father, one to the son and one

1730
01:38:11,319 --> 01:38:13,359
to the spirit, right, because I would mean that the

1731
01:38:13,359 --> 01:38:18,279
Father was too subsistently. What you've got in the case

1732
01:38:18,319 --> 01:38:22,960
of the Father is one relation which is not from

1733
01:38:23,359 --> 01:38:27,039
and toward period, and what you've got in the Son

1734
01:38:27,560 --> 01:38:33,079
is a relation of from and toward right received giving,

1735
01:38:33,960 --> 01:38:35,520
and the way you've got in the Holy Spirit is

1736
01:38:35,520 --> 01:38:39,359
a relation of reception. There's no real thing which is shared,

1737
01:38:41,960 --> 01:38:46,239
although I can speak of the Son and spirit received.

1738
01:38:47,560 --> 01:38:49,520
Speaker 1: Think the Father and the Father and the Son really

1739
01:38:49,520 --> 01:38:50,159
produces spirit.

1740
01:38:51,199 --> 01:38:53,079
Speaker 2: Do you say that the Son and the Holy Spirit

1741
01:38:53,119 --> 01:38:53,960
really receive the Father.

1742
01:38:55,720 --> 01:38:57,960
Speaker 1: We don't use any of this, gobly Gi because we

1743
01:38:58,000 --> 01:39:00,920
don't believe tonism, but I'm we have, but we have

1744
01:39:01,039 --> 01:39:02,079
a way of distinguishing.

1745
01:39:02,520 --> 01:39:04,680
Speaker 2: I'm just saying that receiving is as much of a

1746
01:39:04,720 --> 01:39:10,880
positive predicate as giving, and whether or not you have.

1747
01:39:09,560 --> 01:39:14,960
Speaker 1: That because you affirm hypostatic origin supposedly Roman Caviolts do

1748
01:39:15,560 --> 01:39:18,680
supposedly does. And for the Spirit it is said to

1749
01:39:18,720 --> 01:39:21,560
be from the Father and the Son as a single principle.

1750
01:39:21,920 --> 01:39:25,079
There's no single principle in God that two persons shared

1751
01:39:25,119 --> 01:39:27,479
that the other one doesn't. It's a very simple argument.

1752
01:39:27,920 --> 01:39:29,239
Speaker 2: Yeah, no, and I agree with that.

1753
01:39:29,439 --> 01:39:29,600
Speaker 1: Right.

1754
01:39:29,640 --> 01:39:35,079
Speaker 2: I'm saying that there is no metaphysical reality which father

1755
01:39:35,239 --> 01:39:39,039
has and which father and son both are.

1756
01:39:39,560 --> 01:39:43,439
Speaker 1: Yes, there is. Your councils say together they constitute a

1757
01:39:43,479 --> 01:39:46,239
single principle of the spiration of the spirit in terms

1758
01:39:46,239 --> 01:39:48,039
of this hyposthetic origin. So that.

1759
01:39:49,960 --> 01:39:53,039
Speaker 2: No, because we won't say that the there isn't no

1760
01:39:53,239 --> 01:39:56,239
act of causing. Right, there's relations of tor and there's

1761
01:39:56,319 --> 01:39:58,920
relations of from the standards missing model in this right

1762
01:39:59,039 --> 01:39:59,680
is that you have.

1763
01:40:00,840 --> 01:40:03,600
Speaker 1: Well, you can throw out the word cause and you

1764
01:40:03,640 --> 01:40:06,479
can just say he's the principal source. The father and

1765
01:40:06,520 --> 01:40:09,199
the son in the Roman Catholic dogmas are said to

1766
01:40:09,199 --> 01:40:12,439
together a single source of the hypostasis of the spirit.

1767
01:40:17,119 --> 01:40:20,960
Speaker 2: I'm okay with that. That is directly what you said,

1768
01:40:21,800 --> 01:40:27,319
a what's it, right, A property like whiteness or greenness

1769
01:40:27,399 --> 01:40:31,680
or relation or whatever, which is real in both father

1770
01:40:31,760 --> 01:40:37,399
and son. Again, just as you would not want to say,

1771
01:40:37,640 --> 01:40:41,600
that's simply the fact that both son and spirit are

1772
01:40:41,920 --> 01:40:46,239
from or are or proceed let's say, from the father.

1773
01:40:46,279 --> 01:40:48,239
You're willing to say that, right, that both father and

1774
01:40:48,239 --> 01:40:49,239
son proceed from the Father.

1775
01:40:49,920 --> 01:40:55,239
Speaker 1: No, absolutely not, because proceed is In the Greek the

1776
01:40:55,239 --> 01:40:59,239
eperusis is a specific term that defines who the spirit is,

1777
01:40:59,760 --> 01:41:03,479
and generation is specific to who the son is. Okay,

1778
01:41:03,680 --> 01:41:08,359
is the word we don't. We don't use these common

1779
01:41:08,399 --> 01:41:10,840
attributes of well, both are from another, right, we don't

1780
01:41:10,840 --> 01:41:12,079
do relations of opposition.

1781
01:41:14,560 --> 01:41:17,920
Speaker 2: Look, that's fine. I mean if you want to say

1782
01:41:18,000 --> 01:41:23,640
that this you're talking about cause, right, So you're using

1783
01:41:23,720 --> 01:41:27,600
this word cause. Yes, father causes the quote unquote.

1784
01:41:27,359 --> 01:41:29,800
Speaker 1: The fathers and their councils use this term of the father.

1785
01:41:30,319 --> 01:41:30,520
You know.

1786
01:41:30,880 --> 01:41:33,760
Speaker 2: That's fine. But but you're going with that, right. Is

1787
01:41:33,760 --> 01:41:34,520
there a correlative?

1788
01:41:35,079 --> 01:41:37,239
Speaker 1: By the way, they don't. They don't use the Ariscitilian

1789
01:41:37,319 --> 01:41:41,119
tomistic view of this. That's fine.

1790
01:41:42,279 --> 01:41:44,600
Speaker 2: Are you going to grant that there is a correlative

1791
01:41:44,600 --> 01:41:45,920
to cause which is being caused?

1792
01:41:48,520 --> 01:41:55,279
Speaker 1: Oh? Yeah, okay, correlative? Is it is true to say, listen,

1793
01:41:55,439 --> 01:41:58,199
it is true to say that the son and the

1794
01:41:58,239 --> 01:42:01,920
spirit are from another. That's true. True, that's fine. All

1795
01:42:01,920 --> 01:42:05,800
we're saying is that that that is not what defines

1796
01:42:06,039 --> 01:42:10,239
the persons. And lets us know the distinctions of the hypostats, all.

1797
01:42:10,159 --> 01:42:14,359
Speaker 2: Right, but simply being to another is not what defines

1798
01:42:14,600 --> 01:42:22,680
the persons in domistic theology, either another and not from But.

1799
01:42:22,800 --> 01:42:26,039
Speaker 1: You again understand that it's not supposed to be too.

1800
01:42:26,600 --> 01:42:31,239
But the whole dogma interjects a new principle into the trinity,

1801
01:42:31,800 --> 01:42:35,239
of the Father and the Son together constituting a single

1802
01:42:35,319 --> 01:42:39,000
hyposthetic source of the spirit. So you have a new

1803
01:42:39,039 --> 01:42:42,880
principle of a diad introduced into the trinity, and there

1804
01:42:42,920 --> 01:42:45,800
is no diet. It's always whatever is true is true

1805
01:42:45,800 --> 01:42:49,079
of the persons or of God as a whole. That's

1806
01:42:49,720 --> 01:42:53,239
straight up classic orthodox trinitarianism. I'm saying orthodox in the

1807
01:42:53,239 --> 01:42:53,840
general sense.

1808
01:42:55,560 --> 01:43:01,279
Speaker 2: Yeah, I don't. I'm trying to think of a way

1809
01:43:01,319 --> 01:43:02,960
to save us without just repeating myself again.

1810
01:43:04,079 --> 01:43:09,760
Speaker 1: You're admitting hyposthetic properties and causes or origins we calls

1811
01:43:10,640 --> 01:43:16,279
that's standard timistic trinitarian theology. Mm hmm. And the origin

1812
01:43:16,520 --> 01:43:19,479
of the spirit is from a father and son as

1813
01:43:19,560 --> 01:43:21,279
one principle. Correct.

1814
01:43:26,760 --> 01:43:29,000
Speaker 2: My knowledge of the coin is is Strinitarian theology is

1815
01:43:29,039 --> 01:43:32,359
not sufficient to allow me to say yes to the

1816
01:43:32,520 --> 01:43:33,159
as from.

1817
01:43:34,119 --> 01:43:38,960
Speaker 1: It's may be to check. He does say that the

1818
01:43:39,000 --> 01:43:41,000
barbercal but I don't have the sumo on hand. So

1819
01:43:41,840 --> 01:43:43,720
but anyway, I don't think we're gonna.

1820
01:43:44,119 --> 01:43:46,520
Speaker 2: I would be really hesitant to say that.

1821
01:43:47,800 --> 01:43:50,439
Speaker 1: I would be surprised. That's the dogmatical to the teaching.

1822
01:43:51,479 --> 01:43:54,560
Speaker 2: But I would be surprised if he thinks of father

1823
01:43:54,720 --> 01:43:57,359
and son as together doing.

1824
01:43:57,760 --> 01:43:59,920
Speaker 1: One what's it?

1825
01:44:00,199 --> 01:44:06,680
Speaker 2: H again, but there is no action which is coming

1826
01:44:06,720 --> 01:44:10,159
out of either one of them, right, Uh? In this theology,

1827
01:44:10,279 --> 01:44:14,079
there's just relations of to and from. So again there's

1828
01:44:14,079 --> 01:44:17,439
there's no like source of so that you're you're talking

1829
01:44:17,439 --> 01:44:19,000
about a diad being.

1830
01:44:18,880 --> 01:44:24,760
Speaker 1: Like a again the reason that producing a third thing.

1831
01:44:25,079 --> 01:44:26,439
Speaker 2: And I just think that's the wrong way to think

1832
01:44:26,439 --> 01:44:26,840
about this.

1833
01:44:27,239 --> 01:44:29,199
Speaker 1: Now, it's not the wrong way, it's the right way

1834
01:44:29,239 --> 01:44:31,920
because that's how the Eastern Fathers all categorize it, and

1835
01:44:31,960 --> 01:44:34,239
that's how it's used not just in the councils, but

1836
01:44:34,279 --> 01:44:35,880
also when it comes to Christology.

1837
01:44:36,119 --> 01:44:37,600
Speaker 2: I'm saying that that's the wrong way to understand what

1838
01:44:37,600 --> 01:44:38,439
a quite is saying.

1839
01:44:40,920 --> 01:44:47,079
Speaker 1: Ah anyway, yeah, so do we want to maybe move to?

1840
01:44:48,399 --> 01:44:51,000
So what's that? Do we want to move on? I mean,

1841
01:44:51,039 --> 01:44:53,399
we're just going to keep going, I think, in circles

1842
01:44:53,439 --> 01:44:56,720
about this because you know, so.

1843
01:44:58,960 --> 01:45:01,960
Speaker 2: Maybe even Re Saint John Damascene is going to convince

1844
01:45:02,000 --> 01:45:06,079
me that the filioquay is so bad that it's this

1845
01:45:06,439 --> 01:45:12,319
tremendous roadblock to to any divine simplicity theory. But at

1846
01:45:12,319 --> 01:45:15,800
the moment it seems to me that being able to like,

1847
01:45:15,880 --> 01:45:20,199
I'm not feeling the problem of saying that both father

1848
01:45:20,359 --> 01:45:22,680
and son can be said to spire it because again

1849
01:45:22,720 --> 01:45:24,880
this does not name a real relation, according to Aquinas,

1850
01:45:26,840 --> 01:45:31,039
and so like maybe I should, I would only be

1851
01:45:31,159 --> 01:45:33,399
moved by it at the moment. If to spire eight

1852
01:45:34,439 --> 01:45:37,640
were said to be a real relation defining a person

1853
01:45:37,920 --> 01:45:39,279
for Aquinas, that would be inconsistent.

1854
01:45:39,319 --> 01:45:40,239
Speaker 1: Aquinas does not hold that.

1855
01:45:40,640 --> 01:45:43,800
Speaker 2: But okay, so let me just let's backtle from this,

1856
01:45:43,800 --> 01:45:47,399
can I can I ask you another question about the energies. Okay,

1857
01:45:48,079 --> 01:45:55,359
So the central the central problem, like I was saying earlier,

1858
01:45:55,399 --> 01:45:58,239
thought a Toomas is going to have with talking about

1859
01:45:58,359 --> 01:46:02,720
energies is if energy are in some way going to

1860
01:46:02,800 --> 01:46:08,359
be positing something in the subject. Right, It's the regular

1861
01:46:08,439 --> 01:46:11,720
accidents like wisdom injustice. Right, So when I say that

1862
01:46:11,800 --> 01:46:14,800
I have these right, they are from me, right, they

1863
01:46:14,800 --> 01:46:18,520
exist in me, but they also posit something in me

1864
01:46:18,520 --> 01:46:19,840
if they make me be a certain way.

1865
01:46:20,520 --> 01:46:20,680
Speaker 1: Right.

1866
01:46:20,720 --> 01:46:23,079
Speaker 2: So if we were to take energies in that sense,

1867
01:46:23,439 --> 01:46:26,079
the Thomas is going to be very worried, right, because

1868
01:46:26,079 --> 01:46:29,079
it's going to seem as though you're filling a slot

1869
01:46:29,279 --> 01:46:31,640
or an opening or something in God that the divine

1870
01:46:31,720 --> 01:46:35,880
nature of itself doesn't have. Now, I presume that's not

1871
01:46:36,039 --> 01:46:40,760
what you're saying, right, do you want to characterize how

1872
01:46:40,840 --> 01:46:44,159
your understanding of energy as avoids that? How is predicating

1873
01:46:44,600 --> 01:46:47,960
wisdom as an energy of God different from predicating wisdom

1874
01:46:48,000 --> 01:46:48,920
as an accident of me?

1875
01:46:51,720 --> 01:46:54,640
Speaker 1: Because we don't identify This is the point I was

1876
01:46:54,640 --> 01:46:58,680
making earlier about analogical predication. We don't identify the predicates

1877
01:46:58,800 --> 01:47:01,600
with the divine essence, would then makes them meaningless. We

1878
01:47:01,720 --> 01:47:04,520
say that the predicates are analogical to the energies, which

1879
01:47:04,520 --> 01:47:10,760
are not the divine essence. That was an answer your question,

1880
01:47:10,840 --> 01:47:13,640
because what you're talking about with you is actually an

1881
01:47:13,720 --> 01:47:15,760
argument that Nissa uses when he says that how do

1882
01:47:15,800 --> 01:47:19,800
we understand the difference between act or energy, h and

1883
01:47:19,920 --> 01:47:22,039
will and nature in person? He says, well, let's look

1884
01:47:22,079 --> 01:47:25,119
at a human person. Right, There's there's an action that's

1885
01:47:25,119 --> 01:47:27,840
distinct from the person. The person builds a house that's

1886
01:47:27,840 --> 01:47:30,479
an effect of the work that he did. We might

1887
01:47:30,560 --> 01:47:33,840
learn something about that person, but we don't perceive his

1888
01:47:34,039 --> 01:47:37,600
nature or directly know his hypostasis. By looking at the

1889
01:47:37,600 --> 01:47:39,199
house that he built, we might learn a few things

1890
01:47:39,239 --> 01:47:42,359
about him when we when we interact with that person directly,

1891
01:47:42,680 --> 01:47:45,319
we interact with his hypostasis, which is makes what makes

1892
01:47:45,359 --> 01:47:48,119
him distinct. And we understand that perhaps we share a

1893
01:47:48,159 --> 01:47:51,840
common nature between me and so you have you, mister

1894
01:47:51,920 --> 01:47:54,640
duarct Fingeld, have a human nature that I share. But

1895
01:47:54,720 --> 01:47:59,159
I'm the hypostasis Jay, You're the hypostasis, uh duc Feingel.

1896
01:47:59,479 --> 01:48:03,840
So doesn't now. So the Eastern Fathers make these analogies

1897
01:48:04,079 --> 01:48:05,800
right to who God is, and they say that in

1898
01:48:05,840 --> 01:48:08,800
the same way that a man creates a building, and

1899
01:48:08,800 --> 01:48:11,239
we might learn about him and his wisdom and his

1900
01:48:11,359 --> 01:48:14,640
works that are proper to human nature through creating a house.

1901
01:48:14,720 --> 01:48:18,039
In the same way, there's an analogy to God creating

1902
01:48:18,039 --> 01:48:20,600
the world, and his energy and act of creating the

1903
01:48:20,600 --> 01:48:22,399
world is distinct from who he is in his essence.

1904
01:48:22,600 --> 01:48:24,359
Because if we said that the act of creating the

1905
01:48:24,399 --> 01:48:25,880
world was the same as the divine us, since we

1906
01:48:25,880 --> 01:48:28,079
would be led to all kinds of absurdities, such as

1907
01:48:28,119 --> 01:48:30,279
that the creation of the world is exactly the same

1908
01:48:30,279 --> 01:48:34,359
as the conflagration, because both are divine actions. So what

1909
01:48:34,399 --> 01:48:37,600
we say is that the energies of God are the

1910
01:48:37,600 --> 01:48:41,359
things around him. This is the way Thatsius, the Areopagus,

1911
01:48:41,359 --> 01:48:45,000
the Saint Basils sat Gregory, Saint this as they all

1912
01:48:45,119 --> 01:48:48,840
say that. It's the way to understand this is to

1913
01:48:48,920 --> 01:48:52,079
look at when Moses goes up on the mountain, and

1914
01:48:52,239 --> 01:48:55,560
we're told in Exodus that Moses saw God face to face.

1915
01:48:55,720 --> 01:48:57,560
But no man can see God face to face and live.

1916
01:48:57,640 --> 01:49:00,600
So how is this possible? What's possible because that the Theophanes,

1917
01:49:00,840 --> 01:49:03,560
the manifestations of God, the energies of God within history

1918
01:49:03,600 --> 01:49:06,439
that operate can at times even be made visible if

1919
01:49:06,439 --> 01:49:08,039
God so chooses to Right.

1920
01:49:08,079 --> 01:49:10,640
Speaker 2: So I mean all of that you're describing, it's completely

1921
01:49:10,800 --> 01:49:12,960
compatible with what it Quita says about the vine simplicity.

1922
01:49:13,039 --> 01:49:13,920
Speaker 1: Right, No, it's not at all.

1923
01:49:14,279 --> 01:49:17,279
Speaker 2: Sure it is because it absolutely maintains.

1924
01:49:17,159 --> 01:49:19,239
Speaker 1: That the apes are not real in your doctrine.

1925
01:49:20,000 --> 01:49:21,119
Speaker 2: I don't know what you mean by that.

1926
01:49:22,079 --> 01:49:24,399
Speaker 1: So you don't believe that, you don't believe that, you

1927
01:49:24,439 --> 01:49:28,560
don't believe that God's goodness was manifest distinct from the

1928
01:49:28,680 --> 01:49:30,960
essence of God. Mostes didn't see the essence of God.

1929
01:49:31,239 --> 01:49:33,600
Speaker 2: Manifestations of God's goodness are distinct from the essence of God.

1930
01:49:34,039 --> 01:49:37,840
Speaker 1: Right, So look only because you believe they're created effects

1931
01:49:37,880 --> 01:49:39,960
though you don't believe that it's actually the goodness of God.

1932
01:49:40,039 --> 01:49:42,479
You believe that it's a created hologram or effective God.

1933
01:49:42,560 --> 01:49:45,399
This is why RAS intends to not believe that the

1934
01:49:45,479 --> 01:49:48,840
Angel of the Lord it was the preincarnate logos, because

1935
01:49:48,840 --> 01:49:51,079
that's that's impossible and absolute divine simplicity.

1936
01:49:51,479 --> 01:49:53,840
Speaker 2: It seems to me that you're trying to hold two

1937
01:49:53,960 --> 01:49:56,960
incompatible things. So let me try to parse this out.

1938
01:49:57,119 --> 01:49:59,680
Speaker 1: I'm telling you to argue, is revealed right that the

1939
01:50:00,399 --> 01:50:04,359
are the logos pre incarnate hold on person become can

1940
01:50:04,439 --> 01:50:06,399
become manifest within time and space.

1941
01:50:07,720 --> 01:50:10,000
Speaker 2: Yes, I know that the person become manifest and time

1942
01:50:10,000 --> 01:50:10,359
and space.

1943
01:50:10,640 --> 01:50:14,319
Speaker 1: But you don't believe that, sure, I know you don't.

1944
01:50:15,439 --> 01:50:16,920
You don't believe that the ansl of the Lord was

1945
01:50:16,960 --> 01:50:19,760
the logos. The Roman Catholic doctrine is that those are

1946
01:50:19,840 --> 01:50:26,960
created holograms and not Christ himself. That's why you believe

1947
01:50:27,000 --> 01:50:28,920
that the light of Mount Table has created light.

1948
01:50:31,479 --> 01:50:35,159
Speaker 2: Well, let's rewind a little bit, okay, so and we

1949
01:50:35,239 --> 01:50:36,680
can talk about how to make I've.

1950
01:50:36,600 --> 01:50:40,640
Speaker 1: Never met a Catholics that the Theophanies were real or

1951
01:50:40,720 --> 01:50:43,800
that the light of Matthew seventeen the transfiguration was uncreated

1952
01:50:43,880 --> 01:50:46,640
like every Roman Catholic I've ever met. But but you've said,

1953
01:50:46,720 --> 01:50:48,039
like I've ever read.

1954
01:50:49,399 --> 01:50:51,640
Speaker 2: That I was saying. Finus agrees with one hundred percent

1955
01:50:52,239 --> 01:50:55,399
is what you said at the beginning, which is that

1956
01:50:57,920 --> 01:51:02,760
these things which you are calling energies are not attributes

1957
01:51:02,800 --> 01:51:07,119
of God in the sense of things that modify him

1958
01:51:07,239 --> 01:51:09,239
or exist in him to sink from his essence, but

1959
01:51:09,399 --> 01:51:12,720
rather there are things that show up in his works.

1960
01:51:13,239 --> 01:51:16,399
Speaker 1: Saint Basil and Saint Gregorissa use the analogy of the

1961
01:51:16,520 --> 01:51:21,840
sun and its heat and its h right, So the sun,

1962
01:51:21,920 --> 01:51:25,479
the heat and its rays can be genuinely distinguished, but

1963
01:51:25,520 --> 01:51:27,439
they're not exactly the same. We don't believe that the

1964
01:51:27,520 --> 01:51:30,399
fore knowledge of God is exactly the same as the

1965
01:51:30,479 --> 01:51:32,000
wisdom of God, or the love of God, or the

1966
01:51:32,159 --> 01:51:34,960
justice of God. Like the equating the foregn knowledge of

1967
01:51:35,000 --> 01:51:36,800
God with the justice of God makes no sense.

1968
01:51:38,119 --> 01:51:41,279
Speaker 2: Okay, so this is I want to get into that

1969
01:51:41,399 --> 01:51:45,199
argument in a minute, okay, and quick question, so I

1970
01:51:45,319 --> 01:51:47,520
know how to pace myself or what's left? How much

1971
01:51:47,560 --> 01:51:49,560
time do we have left on this?

1972
01:51:51,279 --> 01:51:53,439
Speaker 1: I probably need to go pretty soon. We can set

1973
01:51:53,520 --> 01:51:56,399
up like a part two though, if you want but

1974
01:51:57,239 --> 01:51:59,199
you've been going for how long have we been going?

1975
01:52:00,079 --> 01:52:02,359
Speaker 2: Then our hour and fifty minutes?

1976
01:52:02,359 --> 01:52:05,199
Speaker 1: I think, okay, so let's say two hours and then

1977
01:52:05,239 --> 01:52:08,319
maybe we can pick up at a part two if

1978
01:52:08,359 --> 01:52:08,880
you want to do it.

1979
01:52:09,279 --> 01:52:12,720
Speaker 2: Sure sounds good. Yeah, so I think which I was

1980
01:52:13,279 --> 01:52:16,159
trying to get out with the energy thing. Right, So

1981
01:52:16,399 --> 01:52:19,279
what a Coitas wants to deny, which I would want

1982
01:52:19,319 --> 01:52:21,439
to deny with them, is that that's something you picked

1983
01:52:21,640 --> 01:52:23,000
justice in four and knowledge. So let's go with that,

1984
01:52:23,399 --> 01:52:25,600
all right, I would want he would want to deny

1985
01:52:27,359 --> 01:52:34,279
that these things manifested in the world. Right, So let's

1986
01:52:34,319 --> 01:52:39,479
say the justice of the nation of sinners, or the

1987
01:52:39,800 --> 01:52:43,199
justice or the fore knowledge manifested in prophecy or whatever.

1988
01:52:44,079 --> 01:52:45,720
Speaker 1: He would want to deny that these.

1989
01:52:47,680 --> 01:52:51,880
Speaker 2: Manifestations are attributes existing in God in the way in

1990
01:52:51,920 --> 01:52:57,520
which I described quantities and qualities as existing in their subjects. Right,

1991
01:52:57,600 --> 01:52:59,439
does that make sense? In other words, they don't pose it.

1992
01:53:00,279 --> 01:53:03,199
What you just described, what Aquitans is holding with divine

1993
01:53:03,199 --> 01:53:04,560
simplicity is the same.

1994
01:53:04,680 --> 01:53:05,479
Speaker 1: In this respect.

1995
01:53:05,880 --> 01:53:08,600
Speaker 2: Neither of you seems to me want to say that

1996
01:53:08,720 --> 01:53:12,800
there is something in God distinct from the essence, which

1997
01:53:12,840 --> 01:53:15,359
is nonetheless makes God be a certain way.

1998
01:53:18,119 --> 01:53:22,439
Speaker 1: Can we agree about that? As far as I understand

1999
01:53:22,479 --> 01:53:23,600
your meaning, I'm not sure.

2000
01:53:24,079 --> 01:53:26,680
Speaker 2: There's no so in my soul, there's a little do

2001
01:53:26,840 --> 01:53:30,680
hickey if you like. The virtue of justice, which I

2002
01:53:30,800 --> 01:53:34,479
wasn't born with, it doesn't come with my soul, Please God,

2003
01:53:34,520 --> 01:53:36,159
I've acquired a little bit of it over the course

2004
01:53:36,159 --> 01:53:39,439
of the last thirty years, and it makes me be

2005
01:53:39,560 --> 01:53:43,199
in a certain way. And it's distinct from me. Right.

2006
01:53:43,359 --> 01:53:47,760
That's not what you mean by energies, right. What you

2007
01:53:47,880 --> 01:53:50,119
mean by energy in my case would be something like

2008
01:53:50,560 --> 01:53:53,239
I do something just right, and that shows you.

2009
01:53:55,800 --> 01:53:57,640
Speaker 1: Most of the time, for example, what you.

2010
01:53:57,680 --> 01:53:59,760
Speaker 2: Actually see is my just action. Am I getting that right?

2011
01:54:00,159 --> 01:54:02,680
Speaker 1: Correct? For example, in the New Testament, when inner gaia

2012
01:54:02,840 --> 01:54:05,319
is used, it's it's for example, when Paul talks about

2013
01:54:05,319 --> 01:54:07,680
the operations of the spirit, right, So the energy of

2014
01:54:07,720 --> 01:54:09,960
the spirit is when he's talking about like the gifts

2015
01:54:10,000 --> 01:54:13,319
of the spirit. So when the spirit grants prophecy, when

2016
01:54:13,359 --> 01:54:16,439
he grants mercy to different gifts to the saints, the

2017
01:54:16,560 --> 01:54:19,399
charismatic gifts. I don't mean charismaticism, you know what I mean.

2018
01:54:20,439 --> 01:54:23,000
The word that's used there is inner gaya, which just

2019
01:54:23,079 --> 01:54:27,840
signifies divine operations or actions. Yeah, and sometimes yes, we

2020
01:54:27,920 --> 01:54:30,800
would say that if you're talking about the attributes the

2021
01:54:30,880 --> 01:54:33,279
love of God, we believe that is an energy, and

2022
01:54:33,439 --> 01:54:35,880
we even believe that the knowledge that we have that

2023
01:54:36,000 --> 01:54:40,039
God's essence is one is also an energetic truth that

2024
01:54:40,119 --> 01:54:42,920
we learned through vind revelation. Yeah.

2025
01:54:43,039 --> 01:54:45,800
Speaker 2: So I if I'm trying to make sense of what

2026
01:54:45,880 --> 01:54:48,680
you're saying and transporting it into my categories, I think

2027
01:54:48,720 --> 01:54:50,319
I kind of sent to a lot of it. But

2028
01:54:50,399 --> 01:54:52,439
it's going to sound like this, So tell me if

2029
01:54:52,439 --> 01:54:57,319
you've got problems with this translation. So it seems as

2030
01:54:57,399 --> 01:55:00,720
though you want to say that the energy can refer

2031
01:55:00,800 --> 01:55:04,039
to when I speak of the energy of God's justice

2032
01:55:04,239 --> 01:55:07,199
or of his unity or whatever. What you mean is

2033
01:55:07,800 --> 01:55:10,399
not that there is an attribute distinct from the divine

2034
01:55:10,520 --> 01:55:14,640
essence which adheres in the divine essence, but rather one

2035
01:55:14,720 --> 01:55:17,079
of two things. And maybe you think that you said

2036
01:55:17,119 --> 01:55:18,600
the same thing. They don't sound the same to me.

2037
01:55:19,039 --> 01:55:19,199
Speaker 1: Oh.

2038
01:55:19,520 --> 01:55:23,319
Speaker 2: Thing one would be there's a work done in creation

2039
01:55:24,079 --> 01:55:27,920
which manifests that which I am calling God's justice right,

2040
01:55:27,960 --> 01:55:29,720
So that would be like the punishment of this sinner,

2041
01:55:31,359 --> 01:55:36,560
And the other one would be the content which I

2042
01:55:36,680 --> 01:55:38,600
am predicating of God. Right, So when I say it right,

2043
01:55:38,640 --> 01:55:41,840
so you've got thing one, that's this thing which happened

2044
01:55:41,920 --> 01:55:45,479
right here, the ciner got punished. And then there's thing too,

2045
01:55:45,600 --> 01:55:48,399
which is as a result of seeing this, I predicate

2046
01:55:49,920 --> 01:55:54,800
this concept that I have of justice of God. And

2047
01:55:54,880 --> 01:55:56,800
I don't want to say that this concept that I

2048
01:55:56,880 --> 01:56:00,439
have of justice is like a concept of God, but

2049
01:56:00,520 --> 01:56:02,279
I do want to say that I can predicate it

2050
01:56:02,319 --> 01:56:04,239
of Him. And so because you want to, on the

2051
01:56:04,319 --> 01:56:07,359
one hand, deny that what I've got in my mind

2052
01:56:07,439 --> 01:56:10,439
of justice equals God, but on the other hand, you

2053
01:56:10,560 --> 01:56:14,199
want to affirm that it gets to God somehow. You

2054
01:56:14,279 --> 01:56:15,720
call this an energy, and this is an energy in

2055
01:56:15,760 --> 01:56:19,279
a different sense from the actual work of damning the center.

2056
01:56:19,600 --> 01:56:20,720
Is that all sound fair?

2057
01:56:20,800 --> 01:56:26,119
Speaker 1: So far? Well? I laid out three distinctions at the beginning,

2058
01:56:26,159 --> 01:56:28,720
where I was talking about the energies of God as

2059
01:56:28,800 --> 01:56:32,880
relating to eternal manifestation, the energies of God relating to creation,

2060
01:56:33,720 --> 01:56:36,600
and then some energies that let's just.

2061
01:56:36,600 --> 01:56:39,520
Speaker 2: Stick with the things like justice and fore knowledge for

2062
01:56:39,560 --> 01:56:39,920
the moment.

2063
01:56:40,239 --> 01:56:43,039
Speaker 1: Well, there's a sense in which I mean, you could

2064
01:56:43,039 --> 01:56:45,720
say God is even and that's where I wanted this

2065
01:56:45,800 --> 01:56:47,159
double distinction to show up.

2066
01:56:50,039 --> 01:56:54,720
Speaker 2: Okay, well you get trinitarian stuff and leaving aside hypostatic

2067
01:56:54,840 --> 01:56:55,680
union stuff.

2068
01:56:55,399 --> 01:56:58,279
Speaker 1: And all that. Well, but I want to stress for

2069
01:56:58,439 --> 01:57:00,399
us all these things are related, because you're not going

2070
01:57:00,479 --> 01:57:03,479
to have the essence energy distinction without the proper doctrine

2071
01:57:03,600 --> 01:57:07,159
of the Father as the ark and the right order theologiate.

2072
01:57:07,319 --> 01:57:11,000
So it's not like these things operate in in and

2073
01:57:11,840 --> 01:57:14,359
discreete from the other other doctrines. They all hang or

2074
01:57:14,399 --> 01:57:16,840
fall together. I'll bear that in mind.

2075
01:57:17,560 --> 01:57:20,600
Speaker 2: And so tell me if I'm if my lumping things,

2076
01:57:20,920 --> 01:57:25,119
or if I if I'm saying something which would be

2077
01:57:25,159 --> 01:57:30,279
corrected by bringing in some of the other sides. So

2078
01:57:31,760 --> 01:57:33,000
what Acquittance would want to say?

2079
01:57:33,199 --> 01:57:33,319
Speaker 1: Right?

2080
01:57:33,399 --> 01:57:36,960
Speaker 2: So, in this case of understanding seeing God's justice and

2081
01:57:37,039 --> 01:57:40,000
predicating it of him, right, we'll you'll deny that there

2082
01:57:40,079 --> 01:57:44,479
is a what sit which is up there in God,

2083
01:57:44,640 --> 01:57:48,000
which is distinct from God's essence to which I am

2084
01:57:48,079 --> 01:57:51,079
referring when I say that God is just. What he

2085
01:57:51,119 --> 01:57:56,000
would affirm is that there are three things involved. There

2086
01:57:56,079 --> 01:57:59,319
is the action which is just, There is my concept

2087
01:57:59,399 --> 01:58:04,560
of justice, and there's the divine essence, which bears some

2088
01:58:04,680 --> 01:58:07,279
sort of resemblance to my concept.

2089
01:58:07,760 --> 01:58:10,119
Speaker 1: Yeah, but it doesn't. And that's the whole point. Because

2090
01:58:10,319 --> 01:58:13,840
the things you had are particular, and they're discrete, and

2091
01:58:13,880 --> 01:58:16,119
they're related to things in time and space and history

2092
01:58:16,560 --> 01:58:20,479
and the absolutely simple essence which is supposedly identical to

2093
01:58:20,600 --> 01:58:24,039
divine justice, God's justice. There's no way to know that

2094
01:58:24,119 --> 01:58:26,880
that's what you're experiencing or bridging that gap, because all

2095
01:58:26,920 --> 01:58:29,399
you know is all you know is creative effects. Right.

2096
01:58:29,640 --> 01:58:31,720
Speaker 2: So, but I mean so, but that's true of this

2097
01:58:31,840 --> 01:58:32,640
isn't just true of God?

2098
01:58:32,720 --> 01:58:32,800
Speaker 1: Right?

2099
01:58:32,880 --> 01:58:35,560
Speaker 2: So we know all things through their operations, right, I

2100
01:58:35,600 --> 01:58:39,159
don't have any direct access to you, right, to you

2101
01:58:40,560 --> 01:58:41,920
the operation of talking.

2102
01:58:41,840 --> 01:58:45,079
Speaker 1: Right, that's how you and I know each other. But

2103
01:58:45,640 --> 01:58:49,319
it's not just created effects. In terms of knowing God,

2104
01:58:49,600 --> 01:58:52,199
and in terms of knowing God, it's beyond creative effects.

2105
01:58:52,239 --> 01:58:54,880
That was what was true generally for the Old Testament period,

2106
01:58:55,079 --> 01:58:58,840
signs and symbols. Now we see Christ face to face,

2107
01:58:58,920 --> 01:59:03,279
as Paul says and said, dudes, three, that's right. No,

2108
01:59:03,439 --> 01:59:05,359
you believe in the beatific vision. You don't believe we

2109
01:59:05,439 --> 01:59:06,479
see Christ face to face.

2110
01:59:09,159 --> 01:59:11,079
Speaker 2: I believe that what it means to say that I

2111
01:59:11,159 --> 01:59:13,119
see Christ face to face now is different from what

2112
01:59:13,199 --> 01:59:14,720
it means to see Christ face to face in the

2113
01:59:14,760 --> 01:59:16,159
beertopic vision, if that's what you mean.

2114
01:59:16,479 --> 01:59:18,399
Speaker 1: Right, because now it's only creative effects.

2115
01:59:20,920 --> 01:59:25,760
Speaker 2: Yeah, so we're mixing issues again. I think one of

2116
01:59:25,800 --> 01:59:29,000
the things I know that is the justice my life,

2117
01:59:29,000 --> 01:59:30,680
and I know that this is big for Palamas and

2118
01:59:30,920 --> 01:59:31,319
the original.

2119
01:59:31,439 --> 01:59:33,680
Speaker 1: How do you know that it's the justice of God

2120
01:59:34,239 --> 01:59:37,640
and not the foregnoledge or love of God that you're experiencing.

2121
01:59:39,600 --> 01:59:42,079
Speaker 2: So Colonus would say, depending on what you mean by that,

2122
01:59:42,199 --> 01:59:43,279
that's uh.

2123
01:59:43,920 --> 01:59:46,199
Speaker 1: Well, I think it matters whether I'm under God's justice.

2124
01:59:46,520 --> 01:59:54,199
Speaker 2: Like, hold on, if you're talking about right, so I

2125
01:59:54,279 --> 01:59:56,920
can say this action right, So let's say that this

2126
01:59:57,079 --> 02:00:02,039
action here seems to exemplify uh, God's or or whatever. Right,

2127
02:00:02,119 --> 02:00:05,840
So the center gets failed like twenty times and gets

2128
02:00:05,920 --> 02:00:09,720
this huge insects of grace and conversion. Okay, what is

2129
02:00:09,800 --> 02:00:12,479
it that allows me to say that the name mercy

2130
02:00:12,560 --> 02:00:16,039
is most applicable to this situation? It would be because

2131
02:00:16,079 --> 02:00:18,760
what I see of this situation most maps of my

2132
02:00:18,840 --> 02:00:20,399
creaturely concept of mercy.

2133
02:00:21,359 --> 02:00:24,680
Speaker 1: But to say that your creaturely concepts are analogous right

2134
02:00:25,000 --> 02:00:28,039
to something that is completely unlike the things that you

2135
02:00:28,199 --> 02:00:30,720
think you have. Like in other words, the divine justice

2136
02:00:30,800 --> 02:00:31,960
is not like human justice.

2137
02:00:32,079 --> 02:00:36,199
Speaker 2: Right, of course I'm going to object to completely unlike

2138
02:00:36,359 --> 02:00:36,720
of course.

2139
02:00:36,880 --> 02:00:40,600
Speaker 1: But so so it's analogous. It's an analogy. But the

2140
02:00:40,680 --> 02:00:42,800
thing that you that you're making an analogy to is

2141
02:00:42,880 --> 02:00:48,079
absolutely simple, that's right, and all and all the predicates

2142
02:00:48,119 --> 02:00:52,000
are actually identified. So how do you know that you're

2143
02:00:52,039 --> 02:00:55,760
actually experiencing one or the other because they're not really distinct.

2144
02:00:55,840 --> 02:00:58,159
Speaker 2: Right, So it depends on what you mean by what

2145
02:00:58,319 --> 02:01:02,359
you're experiencing. Right, if you're saying that I'm experiencing God, right,

2146
02:01:02,439 --> 02:01:05,159
so if you're asking which part of God I'm experiencing it,

2147
02:01:05,319 --> 02:01:08,039
I'm saying that is experiencing any part of God, because

2148
02:01:08,079 --> 02:01:10,680
God doesn't have parts. But if you're asking why am

2149
02:01:10,720 --> 02:01:13,920
I applying this name to this manifestation, it's because this

2150
02:01:14,199 --> 02:01:19,239
manifestation captures more of this concept that I have than

2151
02:01:19,319 --> 02:01:22,000
of that concept. Yeah, I don't see a problem.

2152
02:01:21,800 --> 02:01:24,520
Speaker 1: That bridge between the concept and the thing. There's no

2153
02:01:24,600 --> 02:01:27,439
bridge between the concept and the absolutely simple essence. You

2154
02:01:27,560 --> 02:01:30,840
never know that actual thing. You only know creative effects,

2155
02:01:31,119 --> 02:01:34,199
and you don't know I never You don't know if

2156
02:01:34,239 --> 02:01:36,880
your creative effects match up to this thing. How can they?

2157
02:01:40,079 --> 02:01:42,600
So this is why Palamas calls it atheism.

2158
02:01:43,319 --> 02:01:50,159
Speaker 2: Yeah, yeah, yeah, So I'm not going to say repeat

2159
02:01:50,199 --> 02:01:52,039
what you said right before that last thing.

2160
02:01:53,760 --> 02:01:57,479
Speaker 1: All that you experience in your life or the created

2161
02:01:57,560 --> 02:02:01,640
effects of this this super monad essence, you never experience

2162
02:02:02,119 --> 02:02:08,279
a direct example of God himself or God's justice within

2163
02:02:08,359 --> 02:02:11,359
time and space. You only experience creative effects of God.

2164
02:02:11,840 --> 02:02:13,760
And so when you talk about the love of God,

2165
02:02:14,000 --> 02:02:16,159
or the fore knowledge of God or the mercy of God,

2166
02:02:16,479 --> 02:02:19,319
you're not actually talking about something that you know that

2167
02:02:19,399 --> 02:02:23,880
you've experienced. You're only talking about a creaturely analogue that

2168
02:02:24,239 --> 02:02:27,159
that you hope matches up to this absolutely simple essence,

2169
02:02:27,520 --> 02:02:30,920
wherein all of the attributes are the exact same, So

2170
02:02:31,600 --> 02:02:32,399
it's meaningless.

2171
02:02:32,960 --> 02:02:35,159
Speaker 2: The problem is the word I think that we're using

2172
02:02:35,840 --> 02:02:39,239
talk about in two different senses. Right, So there.

2173
02:02:40,760 --> 02:02:43,439
Speaker 1: Doesn't work if absolutely divind simplicity is true, that's the

2174
02:02:43,479 --> 02:02:48,319
crux of the argument, because all of the things that

2175
02:02:48,359 --> 02:02:51,359
you're talking about are not like an absolutely simple essence.

2176
02:02:53,279 --> 02:02:56,279
One creaturely effect is just you're just interpreting a creaturely

2177
02:02:56,319 --> 02:03:03,199
effect compared to some other creaturely effect. Yeah, so figure

2178
02:03:03,199 --> 02:03:04,079
out where to start hearing again.

2179
02:03:04,119 --> 02:03:09,159
Speaker 2: All right, So look, I just disagree with your claim,

2180
02:03:09,279 --> 02:03:10,880
and then we'll see if I can give a principle

2181
02:03:10,880 --> 02:03:12,800
of reason for disagree with it. I just disagree with

2182
02:03:12,880 --> 02:03:19,079
the claim that if X is limited and why is

2183
02:03:19,159 --> 02:03:23,279
infinite and per se rather than participate participated that it

2184
02:03:23,359 --> 02:03:26,600
follows that X is that there is no similarity whatsoever

2185
02:03:26,680 --> 02:03:27,840
between X and all you.

2186
02:03:28,159 --> 02:03:30,479
Speaker 1: All you know is creative effects, and you never know

2187
02:03:30,600 --> 02:03:32,720
that thing itself, so you have no reference for it.

2188
02:03:34,079 --> 02:03:38,520
Speaker 2: Yeah, when I say, let's let's try to give concrete examples, right.

2189
02:03:39,239 --> 02:03:40,920
Speaker 1: That is the analogy andthis right.

2190
02:03:41,399 --> 02:03:44,800
Speaker 2: Mm hmm, I'm not quite sure how you think these words,

2191
02:03:44,840 --> 02:03:46,520
So let me just try to give concrete examples, and

2192
02:03:46,600 --> 02:03:47,640
let's see where we part way.

2193
02:03:48,159 --> 02:03:51,319
Speaker 1: The analogy andthis and aquitas analogae of being, right, is

2194
02:03:51,359 --> 02:03:54,159
that there's a we can look at the world, we

2195
02:03:54,239 --> 02:03:57,239
can see being. We can predicate that God is the

2196
02:03:57,399 --> 02:04:00,399
super being. But of course he doesn't have being in

2197
02:04:00,479 --> 02:04:03,039
the exact same way as everything else has being, because

2198
02:04:03,399 --> 02:04:06,239
the being in this world is composite. It's caused. The

2199
02:04:06,359 --> 02:04:09,600
being that God has is the super being that's uncaused

2200
02:04:10,119 --> 02:04:15,039
and not composite. Right, So there's there's an assumption of analogy, right,

2201
02:04:15,159 --> 02:04:19,640
and we're not using unibical predication. We're using analogy, right.

2202
02:04:19,720 --> 02:04:21,199
Speaker 2: I Mean the idea is that's supposed to be the

2203
02:04:21,239 --> 02:04:25,399
same thing signified, but different mode of signification. And that's

2204
02:04:25,439 --> 02:04:26,520
your classic line.

2205
02:04:28,399 --> 02:04:28,520
Speaker 1: Right.

2206
02:04:28,560 --> 02:04:30,119
Speaker 2: So let me just try to give an example.

2207
02:04:30,640 --> 02:04:34,000
Speaker 1: So when I say that you.

2208
02:04:34,680 --> 02:04:39,000
Speaker 2: Are loving or whatever, right, so I don't have access

2209
02:04:40,479 --> 02:04:43,640
to the habit of love which is in your soul,

2210
02:04:45,000 --> 02:04:49,479
but I do have access to the actions by which

2211
02:04:49,720 --> 02:04:52,520
you work for the good of others, right, and so

2212
02:04:52,640 --> 02:04:57,119
on the basis of your doing these actions, I creditate

2213
02:04:57,479 --> 02:05:01,039
love of you. Where love means that in you by

2214
02:05:01,159 --> 02:05:03,319
virtue of which you will the good for others, and

2215
02:05:03,399 --> 02:05:04,399
you see you seek their good.

2216
02:05:05,039 --> 02:05:05,159
Speaker 1: Right.

2217
02:05:06,279 --> 02:05:10,279
Speaker 2: So and in us this that by which you will

2218
02:05:10,520 --> 02:05:13,479
and you seek work for the good of others, is

2219
02:05:13,560 --> 02:05:16,000
this extra little habit which is added on to your soul,

2220
02:05:16,039 --> 02:05:17,880
and which is different from the habit of wisdom, as

2221
02:05:17,960 --> 02:05:19,720
evidenced by the fact that you can have one without

2222
02:05:19,720 --> 02:05:20,000
the other.

2223
02:05:21,479 --> 02:05:23,079
Speaker 1: We just don't use these categories.

2224
02:05:24,000 --> 02:05:28,680
Speaker 2: I'm just trying to explain what, okay, And so when

2225
02:05:28,720 --> 02:05:31,760
I talk about God's having love, it would be the

2226
02:05:31,840 --> 02:05:34,600
same same sort of deal in this respect. And I

2227
02:05:34,640 --> 02:05:37,680
don't have access to God's love. I don't see inside

2228
02:05:37,760 --> 02:05:40,319
his essence. What I have access to, just like you said,

2229
02:05:40,399 --> 02:05:44,119
is are these manifestations I see God becoming man and

2230
02:05:44,199 --> 02:05:44,680
dying on the.

2231
02:05:44,680 --> 02:05:45,239
Speaker 1: Cross for us.

2232
02:05:47,760 --> 02:05:51,800
Speaker 2: I'm not quite done yet. And because of this right,

2233
02:05:51,960 --> 02:05:55,000
so I say when I say that God is has love,

2234
02:05:55,319 --> 02:05:57,479
is love, what I mean is that there is in

2235
02:05:57,640 --> 02:06:01,960
God that by which he does this act, which is

2236
02:06:02,119 --> 02:06:04,600
seeking the good, of seeking the good of others. It's

2237
02:06:04,720 --> 02:06:08,199
just that in this case, that by which he does

2238
02:06:08,279 --> 02:06:12,840
this operation is not an extra little what's it which

2239
02:06:12,920 --> 02:06:13,720
is added on to him?

2240
02:06:13,720 --> 02:06:14,439
Speaker 1: It's just him.

2241
02:06:15,840 --> 02:06:19,359
Speaker 2: And I can't fathom that. But that's what I means.

2242
02:06:19,479 --> 02:06:23,920
That's why I predicate the same word of me and

2243
02:06:24,359 --> 02:06:28,359
of you and of God. Yeah, analogic categories, that's fine,

2244
02:06:28,359 --> 02:06:31,680
But I understrying to make sense of what what we're saying, like,

2245
02:06:32,159 --> 02:06:35,199
why we think that it makes sense to apply the term,

2246
02:06:35,800 --> 02:06:38,199
uh loving, let's say to God.

2247
02:06:38,600 --> 02:06:43,159
Speaker 1: But you're only looking at created analogs and none of

2248
02:06:43,199 --> 02:06:45,520
those things are the thing itself. So you don't actually

2249
02:06:45,560 --> 02:06:48,479
know that God has loved? Do I know that you

2250
02:06:48,560 --> 02:06:52,880
have love? Yeah? But but knowing that I have love,

2251
02:06:52,960 --> 02:06:55,399
doesn't mean that you know Godhill, because how do I

2252
02:06:55,760 --> 02:06:56,960
another creative effect?

2253
02:06:57,520 --> 02:06:59,000
Speaker 2: How do I know that you have love.

2254
02:07:00,600 --> 02:07:03,279
Speaker 1: Because you have a personal interaction with me and you're

2255
02:07:03,319 --> 02:07:04,039
in your doctrine.

2256
02:07:04,039 --> 02:07:08,319
Speaker 2: It's not, Well, what do I have to have a

2257
02:07:08,359 --> 02:07:10,359
personal interaction with you to know that you have love?

2258
02:07:12,239 --> 02:07:15,319
Speaker 1: Well, you might hear secondhand from somebody, But the point

2259
02:07:15,399 --> 02:07:19,399
is that that we're not we're talking about God himself.

2260
02:07:19,560 --> 02:07:21,560
Speaker 2: Right. Well, no, but I'm saying that both of these

2261
02:07:21,640 --> 02:07:24,520
things right, So it can be right soon case of

2262
02:07:24,600 --> 02:07:26,520
you and me. Right, it can be the case that

2263
02:07:26,560 --> 02:07:28,920
I see you doing something good to another, or I

2264
02:07:28,960 --> 02:07:30,640
can see you doing something good to me, like taking

2265
02:07:30,680 --> 02:07:32,800
these two hours out of your day to talk to me. Right,

2266
02:07:34,159 --> 02:07:36,880
And both of these give me right allow me to

2267
02:07:36,920 --> 02:07:40,800
predicate with you something which I don't directly see. But

2268
02:07:40,880 --> 02:07:44,119
how do you know that that is God showing love

2269
02:07:44,199 --> 02:07:48,880
to you as opposed to somebody else? No, if God

2270
02:07:49,000 --> 02:07:51,760
is an absolutely simple essence, you don't know what. You

2271
02:07:51,840 --> 02:07:53,760
don't know that you're actually experiencing any of these things.

2272
02:07:53,800 --> 02:07:56,840
You can only do analogical predication because of the effect

2273
02:07:57,199 --> 02:07:59,680
and the thing which I am seeing, which who don't know.

2274
02:08:00,039 --> 02:08:03,239
Speaker 1: You don't know that that created effect is an action

2275
02:08:03,399 --> 02:08:05,399
of love, because you don't know God himself.

2276
02:08:06,600 --> 02:08:10,319
Speaker 2: But I think you're getting the sequence of questions backwards, right,

2277
02:08:10,359 --> 02:08:13,279
So what I mean by love just is right that

2278
02:08:13,560 --> 02:08:15,159
by which you do this kind.

2279
02:08:15,039 --> 02:08:17,960
Speaker 1: Of operation, you don't know that God is doing that.

2280
02:08:18,840 --> 02:08:22,000
Speaker 2: I don't I mean, I don't know that this operation

2281
02:08:22,119 --> 02:08:23,720
that I see in front of me is an active love.

2282
02:08:24,199 --> 02:08:25,960
Speaker 1: Is that what you're saying, You don't know that God

2283
02:08:26,159 --> 02:08:28,880
is doing that act of love because God is outside

2284
02:08:28,920 --> 02:08:32,079
of time and space and absolutely simple according to this doctrine.

2285
02:08:32,279 --> 02:08:36,880
Speaker 2: So what you're saying, it could be for all I know,

2286
02:08:36,920 --> 02:08:37,840
it could be somebody else.

2287
02:08:38,319 --> 02:08:41,560
Speaker 1: Maybe maybe God is exacting justice on you. You don't know,

2288
02:08:44,920 --> 02:08:52,279
because atributes are the exact same as the essence, and

2289
02:08:52,359 --> 02:08:55,000
all the attributes are synonymous with one another. You never

2290
02:08:55,199 --> 02:08:57,960
know God or what you're actually experiencing within history is

2291
02:08:58,039 --> 02:08:58,479
from God.

2292
02:09:00,199 --> 02:09:02,239
Speaker 2: I don't see how that follows at all. Right, So

2293
02:09:02,359 --> 02:09:04,920
it seems as though it's perfectly possible for one and

2294
02:09:05,039 --> 02:09:07,960
the same form that I just on the level of creatures.

2295
02:09:08,000 --> 02:09:10,119
Forget God for the moment, just on the level of creature,

2296
02:09:10,159 --> 02:09:12,119
it's perfectly possible for one and the same, but the

2297
02:09:12,239 --> 02:09:15,960
reasoning creatures hold on. It's perfectly possible for one in

2298
02:09:16,000 --> 02:09:19,159
the same form to be responsible for different operations, unless

2299
02:09:19,199 --> 02:09:22,319
for different manifestations, and to give does that work for God?

2300
02:09:22,800 --> 02:09:25,239
Speaker 1: You can't. You can't reason that up to God like

2301
02:09:25,359 --> 02:09:27,479
Thomas want to do. I'm telling you what I'm trying

2302
02:09:27,560 --> 02:09:29,840
to argue is that the analogia doesn't work in your

2303
02:09:29,920 --> 02:09:33,600
view because God is absolutely simple. If you believe in

2304
02:09:33,640 --> 02:09:37,079
the essen synergy distinction, it would work. No, no, but

2305
02:09:39,000 --> 02:09:44,680
you're gonna have to repeat but the divine essence. Therefore,

2306
02:09:44,800 --> 02:09:47,359
within time and space, you don't actually experience God's love

2307
02:09:47,479 --> 02:09:49,560
or God's mercy. You don't know what you're experiencing if

2308
02:09:49,560 --> 02:09:52,079
you're experiencing God at all, because all you experience in

2309
02:09:52,159 --> 02:09:57,840
creative effects. There's no analogue between what's in your mind

2310
02:09:58,079 --> 02:10:00,359
and the absolutely simple essence Word. All the acts, tributes

2311
02:10:00,399 --> 02:10:03,159
are melded into one giant monead. I don't know.

2312
02:10:04,359 --> 02:10:05,960
Speaker 2: Bear with me for a second. Tell me which part

2313
02:10:06,000 --> 02:10:11,000
of this picture you're being bothered by. Okay, so I

2314
02:10:11,159 --> 02:10:15,880
see this. Let's say I'm Adam. Okay, and let's say

2315
02:10:15,880 --> 02:10:18,840
I know whether let's say, by revelation whatever that God

2316
02:10:19,079 --> 02:10:22,039
just made this place, and he gave me all this

2317
02:10:22,199 --> 02:10:24,800
stuff up to and including this helpmate who's pretty awesome.

2318
02:10:25,399 --> 02:10:26,720
Speaker 1: Uh, for my good.

2319
02:10:27,840 --> 02:10:32,960
Speaker 2: That's definitionally an act of love, right, I'm how you

2320
02:10:33,079 --> 02:10:35,199
know that God did that out of love. Let's say

2321
02:10:35,199 --> 02:10:35,760
God said that.

2322
02:10:37,720 --> 02:10:40,439
Speaker 1: Well, now you're relying on that, which is what we

2323
02:10:40,439 --> 02:10:42,760
would agree. Yeah, you should rely on revelation. You can't

2324
02:10:42,800 --> 02:10:44,199
rely on all these creative effects.

2325
02:10:45,079 --> 02:10:48,800
Speaker 2: Okay, let me see if I can restate it. So

2326
02:10:50,119 --> 02:10:52,319
to say that something is an act of love, right,

2327
02:10:52,319 --> 02:10:55,920
it means that it is done conscious right, It's not

2328
02:10:56,079 --> 02:10:58,199
done randomly, It's done.

2329
02:10:58,239 --> 02:11:00,640
Speaker 1: Deliberately for the good of another.

2330
02:11:03,359 --> 02:11:07,199
Speaker 2: Yeah, okay, And so what you're asking is, how is

2331
02:11:07,239 --> 02:11:10,600
it that I can tell that this act that is

2332
02:11:10,840 --> 02:11:13,199
the creation of the world around me is an act

2333
02:11:13,239 --> 02:11:15,680
which was deliberate and which was done for my good.

2334
02:11:19,399 --> 02:11:20,720
Speaker 1: I mean, I don't know how many times I can

2335
02:11:20,760 --> 02:11:23,319
restate the argument. It's because it's a very simple argue.

2336
02:11:23,319 --> 02:11:24,600
I'm not trying to do anything.

2337
02:11:24,800 --> 02:11:26,319
Speaker 2: Are you denying that? I just want to guess right now.

2338
02:11:26,479 --> 02:11:29,920
Speaker 1: No, I believe that God created the world in love, absolutely,

2339
02:11:30,000 --> 02:11:34,079
But that's because there's a direct bridge between God in

2340
02:11:34,159 --> 02:11:34,720
the world.

2341
02:11:35,000 --> 02:11:37,399
Speaker 2: That I was asking, though, Right, So I'm just saying

2342
02:11:37,560 --> 02:11:40,560
this thing out here. Maybe this is the trouble.

2343
02:11:40,760 --> 02:11:40,880
Speaker 1: Right.

2344
02:11:40,920 --> 02:11:44,640
Speaker 2: So you're saying that you can only know whether something

2345
02:11:45,359 --> 02:11:48,920
counts as an act of love if I have some

2346
02:11:49,000 --> 02:11:52,520
sort of direct, independent access to the source from which

2347
02:11:52,560 --> 02:11:56,039
it sprang. And I'm saying that works exactly the opposite way,

2348
02:11:56,399 --> 02:12:00,439
and that I assume that I infer you like that

2349
02:12:00,600 --> 02:12:03,520
there is a source from which it sprang if I

2350
02:12:03,720 --> 02:12:05,239
see the operation.

2351
02:12:06,039 --> 02:12:06,159
Speaker 1: Right.

2352
02:12:06,239 --> 02:12:08,319
Speaker 2: So, I don't have any direct access to your love,

2353
02:12:08,399 --> 02:12:10,640
and I never will. All that I have access to

2354
02:12:11,039 --> 02:12:14,039
is your operations of love. And I know that whenever

2355
02:12:14,079 --> 02:12:16,840
there is an operation, there is corresponding to it something

2356
02:12:16,960 --> 02:12:19,760
by virtue of which this operation happened. And that's something

2357
02:12:19,880 --> 02:12:23,079
I call the happen of love. And it's exactly I mean, God,

2358
02:12:23,119 --> 02:12:25,359
It's just that in the case of God, that habit

2359
02:12:25,439 --> 02:12:25,720
isn't a.

2360
02:12:25,760 --> 02:12:30,000
Speaker 1: Happen You're just stating the position. You're not addressing the point,

2361
02:12:30,079 --> 02:12:33,479
which is that the God that you're talking about is

2362
02:12:34,000 --> 02:12:38,600
absolutely simple and all the action identified. Right.

2363
02:12:38,680 --> 02:12:41,039
Speaker 2: But what I'm trying to say is to call this

2364
02:12:41,199 --> 02:12:44,000
act an act of love, I don't need to already

2365
02:12:44,159 --> 02:12:46,479
know what it sprang from the direction of inference goes

2366
02:12:46,520 --> 02:12:49,239
the other way. It seems as though you're saying, in

2367
02:12:49,479 --> 02:12:51,239
order you know that this is an act of love,

2368
02:12:51,720 --> 02:12:56,000
I have to first I have access to that from which.

2369
02:12:57,000 --> 02:13:00,239
Speaker 1: You're reasoning up from creatures, and you're saying creaturely loves us,

2370
02:13:00,319 --> 02:13:03,760
that there's some ultimately divine love, and I'm saying that

2371
02:13:03,880 --> 02:13:07,560
that doesn't work, because, for one, what you say God

2372
02:13:07,720 --> 02:13:10,479
is in terms of absolute divine simplicity bears no resemblance

2373
02:13:10,560 --> 02:13:12,399
to the creaturely love that you're trying to make it

2374
02:13:12,439 --> 02:13:13,039
analogous to.

2375
02:13:14,640 --> 02:13:17,920
Speaker 2: And that's just what I fail to see, because it

2376
02:13:18,000 --> 02:13:21,119
seems like the reason all the actions your idea for

2377
02:13:21,239 --> 02:13:24,880
me God good for me, because all of the attributes

2378
02:13:24,920 --> 02:13:27,920
are identified with the divine essence and the distinctions are

2379
02:13:27,960 --> 02:13:28,920
only creaturely.

2380
02:13:29,520 --> 02:13:31,720
Speaker 1: So if the distinctions are only creaturely, you never know

2381
02:13:32,239 --> 02:13:35,039
if the creaturely idea in your head actually matches up

2382
02:13:35,119 --> 02:13:38,079
to the absolutely simple essence that it's supposed to mirror.

2383
02:13:40,319 --> 02:13:42,479
Speaker 2: Let's see, there's another way I can do this. It

2384
02:13:42,560 --> 02:13:46,560
seems to me that you're what you're presupposing here is

2385
02:13:46,680 --> 02:13:52,119
that in order for a predication of a term to

2386
02:13:53,159 --> 02:13:58,800
be truly predicated of a subject, the term has to

2387
02:13:58,920 --> 02:14:03,319
be some morphic in content with some discrete reality in

2388
02:14:03,399 --> 02:14:03,880
the subject.

2389
02:14:04,119 --> 02:14:04,439
Speaker 1: All right.

2390
02:14:04,439 --> 02:14:06,720
Speaker 2: So in other words, in order for me to say

2391
02:14:07,920 --> 02:14:12,560
that you are just, there has to be something in

2392
02:14:12,720 --> 02:14:17,479
you which is has just something real, something distinct from

2393
02:14:17,479 --> 02:14:19,119
all the other the rest of the parts of you,

2394
02:14:20,760 --> 02:14:23,760
which has just what I mean by the word justice

2395
02:14:24,239 --> 02:14:26,079
and nothing else. Are you committed to that.

2396
02:14:30,720 --> 02:14:34,840
Speaker 1: I'm kind of getting a little flustered here, not because

2397
02:14:35,279 --> 02:14:37,279
I just I think we're going around and around in circles.

2398
02:14:37,319 --> 02:14:41,359
Because you're just restating what analogical predication is, and I'm

2399
02:14:42,560 --> 02:14:45,600
asking you to explain how you can really predicate a

2400
02:14:45,720 --> 02:14:48,920
god if all of the attributes of God and the

2401
02:14:49,039 --> 02:14:52,560
names of God are absolutely identical to the divine essence and.

2402
02:14:52,600 --> 02:14:54,920
Speaker 2: You and I'm doing my best to explain that, but

2403
02:14:54,920 --> 02:14:55,399
I'm just trying to.

2404
02:14:55,399 --> 02:14:58,520
Speaker 1: Make sure that you're just restating what analogical predication is,

2405
02:14:58,600 --> 02:14:59,319
and I know what it is.

2406
02:14:59,720 --> 02:15:02,720
Speaker 2: So I'm just asking you to agree with me or

2407
02:15:02,760 --> 02:15:04,239
disagree as I go, so I know where I need

2408
02:15:04,319 --> 02:15:08,520
to need to set up my my battle lines. Are

2409
02:15:09,079 --> 02:15:12,560
you committed to saying that the in order for true

2410
02:15:12,560 --> 02:15:17,039
predication to happen. The formal content of my the termine

2411
02:15:17,039 --> 02:15:21,880
predicating has to be exactly co extensive with a real thing,

2412
02:15:24,000 --> 02:15:24,520
the subject.

2413
02:15:25,159 --> 02:15:27,399
Speaker 1: We don't believe in unibical predication.

2414
02:15:27,960 --> 02:15:31,720
Speaker 2: Okay, So if that's the case, why can't it be

2415
02:15:32,399 --> 02:15:37,079
that two of my terms should have a formal content

2416
02:15:37,199 --> 02:15:43,439
which is less then, uh than they're referent to which

2417
02:15:43,439 --> 02:15:44,279
I'm applying.

2418
02:15:44,039 --> 02:15:47,520
Speaker 1: Them, Because the reference, namely God in this case, is

2419
02:15:47,800 --> 02:15:51,159
completely different because he's absolutely simple, and all of the

2420
02:15:51,239 --> 02:15:52,840
predicates are this are identical.

2421
02:15:56,319 --> 02:15:59,199
Speaker 2: Here we are going in circles. Okay, let's see if

2422
02:15:59,239 --> 02:15:59,960
I can try this another one.

2423
02:16:01,199 --> 02:16:04,199
Speaker 1: And by the way, it doesn't work either to say

2424
02:16:04,319 --> 02:16:07,039
let's start with creaturely love and then reason up because

2425
02:16:07,079 --> 02:16:09,319
we all know what love is. No, we don't. In fact,

2426
02:16:09,359 --> 02:16:12,760
I would again that's a classical foundationalist assumption from this

2427
02:16:12,920 --> 02:16:15,880
kind of epistemology that we would reject. You don't have

2428
02:16:16,039 --> 02:16:20,399
a clear idea of something like self evident maxims or

2429
02:16:20,439 --> 02:16:22,479
something like this that you can then reason up to

2430
02:16:22,600 --> 02:16:25,520
build up to God. In fact, if there's no way

2431
02:16:25,560 --> 02:16:30,159
to understand those maxims or those foundations epistemologically or logically

2432
02:16:30,279 --> 02:16:33,040
or whatever without presupposing God's existence.

2433
02:16:34,399 --> 02:16:37,559
Speaker 2: Well, that's a whole other argument. Do you want to

2434
02:16:37,600 --> 02:16:39,959
keep on going with analogy for a better or should

2435
02:16:39,959 --> 02:16:40,719
we just I'm.

2436
02:16:40,559 --> 02:16:44,239
Speaker 1: Gonna have to go. Let's take some super so people

2437
02:16:44,280 --> 02:16:46,639
who are listening, if you want to take if you

2438
02:16:46,680 --> 02:16:49,639
want to ask questions, I'm sure this will take a

2439
02:16:49,680 --> 02:16:54,319
few minutes, but you can ask your super chat questions. Now.

2440
02:16:54,399 --> 02:16:59,440
We already have a couple here, one from Gilaimos Russius

2441
02:16:59,479 --> 02:17:03,520
for five dollar. He says, the Father uncreated, the Son uncreated,

2442
02:17:03,559 --> 02:17:09,159
the Holygos uncreated, not three uncreated, but one uncreated Athenationian creed. Actually,

2443
02:17:09,440 --> 02:17:12,840
even Rome admits that the Athenaian creed was not composed

2444
02:17:12,879 --> 02:17:16,360
by Athenatius. It's a later forgery, and the Orthodox Church

2445
02:17:16,399 --> 02:17:19,040
does not accept the Athnician creed. But yes, we agreed

2446
02:17:19,079 --> 02:17:23,040
that all three of the persons are uncreated. Gillie Mus

2447
02:17:23,200 --> 02:17:27,239
Russius again for five dollars. When the peraclet cometh, whom

2448
02:17:27,239 --> 02:17:28,879
I will send to you from the Father, the spirit

2449
02:17:28,920 --> 02:17:32,799
of truth, who proceeds from the Father, right proceeds from

2450
02:17:32,840 --> 02:17:35,440
the Father, is a statement of our in our view,

2451
02:17:35,559 --> 02:17:39,120
hypostetic origin, and the Father is the sole archae is

2452
02:17:39,200 --> 02:17:41,600
the only source of the Spirit. Jesus says he will

2453
02:17:41,639 --> 02:17:44,559
send the Spirit into time and history. All Orthodox writers

2454
02:17:44,639 --> 02:17:48,120
believe in the mission of the Spirit being sent by Jesus.

2455
02:17:48,319 --> 02:17:50,920
This is why began the debate making the distinction between

2456
02:17:51,520 --> 02:17:54,319
economia or the mission of the Spirit within history, the

2457
02:17:54,399 --> 02:17:58,680
eternal manifestation of the Spirit, which applies the Augustinian psychological

2458
02:17:58,760 --> 02:18:03,200
analogy in Saint Gregor. Almost the Sun eternally manifest the Spirit.

2459
02:18:04,719 --> 02:18:08,159
But then in terms of hypostatic origins, the Father alone

2460
02:18:08,280 --> 02:18:11,600
is the arka soul and cause of the persons in

2461
02:18:11,680 --> 02:18:16,639
our view? Are there any more super chats? If not,

2462
02:18:16,840 --> 02:18:20,760
I think we will call it to a close, give

2463
02:18:20,799 --> 02:18:23,920
them a few minutes. Yeah, man, this was This was

2464
02:18:24,000 --> 02:18:28,319
pretty intense, pretty heated, pretty pretty deep stuff. I appreciate

2465
02:18:29,079 --> 02:18:31,719
doing it, and if we get a few more, appreciate

2466
02:18:31,760 --> 02:18:34,440
the opportunity. Yeah, if we get a few more super chats,

2467
02:18:34,440 --> 02:18:36,840
I'll split the money with you. But I go not

2468
02:18:36,959 --> 02:18:39,479
ending about that. Well, I always do that with guests.

2469
02:18:40,680 --> 02:18:43,159
Any of you, theo nerds out there, won't ask questions,

2470
02:18:44,399 --> 02:18:48,680
send us some money. What we do we do? Two hours?

2471
02:18:49,760 --> 02:18:52,959
A little bit of her Okay, all right, well, I'm

2472
02:18:52,959 --> 02:18:55,000
not seeing any more super chats. So I guess we'll

2473
02:18:55,040 --> 02:18:57,799
call it a close, and thank you doctor fine Gold,

2474
02:18:58,760 --> 02:19:02,840
very eloquent, very good at explicating his positions, good defender

2475
02:19:02,920 --> 02:19:07,200
of Tomism. We will think about this spatimistic heresies, but

2476
02:19:08,360 --> 02:19:10,840
let's do on this for a while and uh we'll

2477
02:19:10,879 --> 02:19:12,280
come back with maybe a part two.

2478
02:19:13,079 --> 02:19:15,280
Speaker 2: All right, well, thank you, all right, God bless you.

2479
02:19:15,680 --> 02:19:17,280
Speaker 1: Thank you Jack too. Man