Speaker 1: Drama.
Speaker 2: Oh these girls is out here, has starting some drama.
Speaker 2: Oh these ladies is getting sassy with me, And I'm
Speaker 2: just so scared.
Speaker 1: I'm so scared.
Speaker 2: I'm so scared that I asked two guys to come
Speaker 2: to debate and they weren't interested in debating. We had
Speaker 2: actually a pretty massive meltdown, as we're gonna see. So
Speaker 2: we're gonna be doing a little bit tonight. I'm gonna
Speaker 2: talk about what happened. Then I'm gonna talk about the
Speaker 2: specific refutations of what we've seen all breckt offer, which
Speaker 2: is pretty low tier stuff, and I'll show you exactly
Speaker 2: why no one is actually interested in all Breck. First,
Speaker 2: so all Brick likes to make a big huff and
Speaker 2: a big stink. And many years ago, when I first
Speaker 2: met Albrecht online, he asked for a debate and we
Speaker 2: talked about this in and it was going to be
Speaker 2: set up this is back in twenty nineteen here, and
Speaker 2: then I would give him a bunch of references, a
Speaker 2: bunch of links, a bunch of things to read, and
Speaker 2: then it would turn out that months later he wasn't
Speaker 2: able to do it, so he would only do originally
Speaker 2: debates several months out. I have several radio shows at
Speaker 2: that time. He wouldn't do YouTube debates, and I'm trying
Speaker 2: to I'm like radio, okay, Boomer, what are you talking about?
Speaker 2: And then I asked him if you'd like to debate
Speaker 2: something else, and the original statement that he gave was, well,
Speaker 2: let's do it six months from now, and then months later, oh,
Speaker 2: let's do it down the road. I've been busy, I've
Speaker 2: got stuff coming on coming up, I've had issues. I
Speaker 2: can't do it, okay. So this became a recurring thing.
Speaker 2: So this is would Saturday in December, So this is
Speaker 2: July twenty nine, twenty nineteen. How about an in person
Speaker 2: debate in December? Six months out? Then he says, let's
Speaker 2: do it. Then he says, here, let's do it dual stream,
Speaker 2: and I said, I don't think double streams will work,
Speaker 2: because at that time we were talking about him coming
Speaker 2: on my stream. And then what he used to do
Speaker 2: is that he would just hope that months later you
Speaker 2: would forget, and then when it came around time for
Speaker 2: the debate, he would say, oh, I've got personal issues
Speaker 2: coming up. And so UBI had a similar type of
Speaker 2: experience with William Albrick, and since that time pretty much
Speaker 2: everyone just quit caring or paying attention to him, and
Speaker 2: he didn't have any audience attraction until he got on
Speaker 2: Shimun's channel anyway. But his papacy stuff is literally just
Speaker 2: the most basic, bitch low tier stuff, as we'll see
Speaker 2: when we get to the all Brick presentation here in
Speaker 2: a moment, and we're gonna have fun reacting to that.
Speaker 2: But before we do, I'll explain what happened today. So
Speaker 2: Shamoon did a stream about the Trinity and Protestant and
Speaker 2: Catholic apologists and their different strategies and takes and who
Speaker 2: has a better model, and whether the Protestants were better
Speaker 2: than the Roman Catholics and so forth, and he said
Speaker 2: something to the fact of, well, right now, the Protestants
Speaker 2: are beating the Catholics on the Trinity because they will
Speaker 2: go to the Old Testament and they'll talk about the
Speaker 2: Nade of the Lord. That's true. However, what I disagreed
Speaker 2: with was that between these two, the protestantlogists and the
Speaker 2: Roman Catholic apologist, he was missing the obvious Orthodox apologists.
Speaker 2: I'm not talking about me, doctor Branson, and the entire
Speaker 2: history of the orthodox monarchical trinitarian model. And then he
Speaker 2: did later mention that now I don't care about, uh,
Speaker 2: the ultimate issue of whether he said that I was
Speaker 2: good to the trinity or whatever, I'm not worried about that.
Speaker 2: My point in dming him was that I don't believe
Speaker 2: either the Protestants or the Roman Catholics have good trinitarian
Speaker 2: models because they don't even have the Triad. And they
Speaker 2: don't have the triad because you don't just have the
Speaker 2: triad as an abstract doctrine in your head. It's not
Speaker 2: a doctrine that you have separate from the doctrine of
Speaker 2: the energies. There is no trinity without energy's doctrine. But
Speaker 2: the weird part about Shimun is that Shamun seems to
Speaker 2: think that you can have theophany, but he doesn't even
Speaker 2: know about the energies. The only way to have Theophanes
Speaker 2: is to have the energetic manifestation of those theophanies. But
Speaker 2: I don't think he even knows that, and I'm going
Speaker 2: to show you the evidence that he doesn't even seem.
Speaker 1: To know that. So here's the horrible thing that I did.
Speaker 2: Apparently, if you message him while he's doing a live stream,
Speaker 2: which I wasn't aware of this. I don't spend all
Speaker 2: my time watching Sam Shamun. I know many of you
Speaker 2: think that I do. But I've watched. I've watched some
Speaker 2: of his muzzle and debates, and that's about it. I
Speaker 2: dared to message him while he was streaming and said, hey,
Speaker 2: let's set up a friendly debate where we have time responses.
Speaker 2: That's the horrible demonic thing I did.
Speaker 1: So.
Speaker 2: Apparently, if you ask Sam Shimun a question while he's
Speaker 2: trying to live stream, you're of the devil.
Speaker 1: I didn't realize this.
Speaker 2: I didn't know that that's what counts as demonic manifestation. Now,
Speaker 2: I've always thought it was a little odd that he
Speaker 2: always calls anyone who disagrees manifesting manifesting manifesting. I mean
Speaker 2: people who have the vices or who lose their temper.
Speaker 2: They're not all possessed and they're all they're not all
Speaker 2: demonic manifestations. This is just bizarre. But one of you,
Speaker 2: some of you might be wondering, well, why did you
Speaker 2: continue on being friends with Sam Chumun for so long? Well,
Speaker 2: I wanted to make Sam Schuman orthodox. I want him
Speaker 2: to become Orthodox, as is the case with everybody that
Speaker 2: we interact with, talk to debate with, and so I
Speaker 2: was always respectful, and I think everybody can attest to
Speaker 2: the fact that at no point in the last seven
Speaker 2: years of knowing Sam Chumun, can anyone point out any
Speaker 2: time where I ever said anything negative at all or critical,
Speaker 2: nothing but respect for Sam Chumun throughout those entire years.
Speaker 2: So it was a very bizarre response because Number one one,
Speaker 2: if you're doing a live stream, don't pay attention to
Speaker 2: Skype messages. All you have to do is just pay
Speaker 2: attention to the live stream. There's no reason to get
Speaker 2: mad over somebody dming you while you're live streaming, And
Speaker 2: why would that make anyone who dms you demonic? Is
Speaker 2: just bizarre, And nothing in the messages was out of
Speaker 2: the norm. Every time I've ever messaged Shamoon or said anything,
Speaker 2: it's always it's just direct, straightforward, no bs, no dancing around,
Speaker 2: just straight up, Hey, I disagree with your take on
Speaker 2: Protestant and Roman Catholic trinity models because you can't have
Speaker 2: this doctrine without the energies. Well, again, that was just
Speaker 2: way over the top. So you'll see here. Why this
Speaker 2: is what was happening.
Speaker 3: Actually he just contacted me on Skype, so you guys
Speaker 3: think he does in here?
Speaker 4: Okay, see this is what happened.
Speaker 1: See what you did?
Speaker 3: Jay? You can't control yourself? Now I wanna because they're
Speaker 3: out here here you go.
Speaker 1: I can't control myself. So just d I mean this guy,
Speaker 1: I can't control myself. I'm springing out medmonically.
Speaker 4: Possessed right here.
Speaker 3: I guess he needs attention and this fan girls are
Speaker 3: pulling at them out.
Speaker 2: I think he thinks that I need the attention when again,
Speaker 2: I brought him on the Alex Jones show. Now he's
Speaker 2: actually gonna make a reference to that later and say
Speaker 2: that I'm crazy conspiracy theorist when he went on.
Speaker 1: The Alex Jones Show.
Speaker 2: So that would mean he's also an insane lune conspiracy
Speaker 2: theorist before coming on the show that I invited him on.
Speaker 3: Here it is, guys, let me show you right now
Speaker 3: as I'm going live. I don't know what's going on.
Speaker 3: He wants to debate William and I William and I
Speaker 3: here let me call him.
Speaker 2: Let me see right here, does this look like demonic manifestation? Right?
Speaker 1: And the other masters.
Speaker 2: The messages say we can even do it in a
Speaker 2: friendly timed response way, like there's nothing It's the same
Speaker 2: kind of reaction with Calvin Robinson.
Speaker 1: Now.
Speaker 2: Part of the reason that this happened too is that
Speaker 2: I talked for months with Sam about how to set
Speaker 2: up the right roundtable, and he thinks they think that
Speaker 2: because no one wants to interact or have anything to
Speaker 2: do with William Albrick or Sam Shamun.
Speaker 1: By the way, I didn't tell him this then what
Speaker 1: hurt his feelings.
Speaker 2: But the other reason the other people don't want to
Speaker 2: interact with all bragged is that they don't want to
Speaker 2: interact with Sam Chamun. And that's all the people in
Speaker 2: my circles. So no one else wanted to come on
Speaker 2: this roundtable. And so I was trying to figure out
Speaker 2: ways to set up the roundtable where we could have
Speaker 2: me to a presentation and then separately all Brick do
Speaker 2: a presentation. Well, I suggested that three or four times,
Speaker 2: and I don't guess. I guess that wasn't good enough
Speaker 2: because no one wanted to interact with Albreck because Albreck
Speaker 2: is a shady character that's fine, and because they don't
Speaker 2: like Sam chumun so.
Speaker 1: But I didn't tell him any of that.
Speaker 2: I just left all that out and tried to organize it,
Speaker 2: by the way I organized the Fresh.
Speaker 1: And Fit thing to bring him on.
Speaker 2: So I don't know what, like, what was a vast
Speaker 2: conspiracy for me all these years to get him, help
Speaker 2: him out with nice interviews, big interviews, big spots, and
Speaker 2: what it was all to go after him to because
Speaker 2: I'm demonically possessed.
Speaker 1: I mean, it's just insane. It's like.
Speaker 2: I disagreed with your take that Protestant and Roman Catholic
Speaker 2: apologist and the pop sphere like Aiken or any of
Speaker 2: those people that they any of them have very good
Speaker 2: takes on the Trinity. And so I asked simply four
Speaker 2: a timed response debate on my channel. Now, I'm going
Speaker 2: to play a eclip in a minutego where he lost
Speaker 2: his mind tonight and said some really insane stuff which
Speaker 2: makes me worried about him. And you're going to see
Speaker 2: that he doesn't even seem to be aware of the
Speaker 2: energy's doctrine, which is odd because he's out here teaching
Speaker 2: the Trinity, debating all these topics, and then he plays
Speaker 2: a victim on his stream and says that you don't
Speaker 2: ask a person who's new to all this to come
Speaker 2: to debate. Well, then why are you teaching? If you're
Speaker 2: new to all this, you've got to be being catechized.
Speaker 2: But this is a problem I'm gonna get to with
Speaker 2: Shamun here in a second. I've got five main issues
Speaker 2: with what the problem is with Sam Shimun, and it's
Speaker 2: probably not what you think. I'm not going to go
Speaker 2: after him on a personal level. I don't do that.
Speaker 2: That's the kind of stuff that people who don't really
Speaker 2: have any anything solid to stand on, that's what they
Speaker 2: go after. I'm going to point out what I think
Speaker 2: is the actual issue here, and it really has nothing
Speaker 2: to do with intellect or doctrines or dogmas or anything
Speaker 2: like that. It has to do with being willing to
Speaker 2: go into the catechumen.
Speaker 1: It that's the problem.
Speaker 2: And I think he's pretty much expressed that he would
Speaker 2: rather go to a Catholic church because quote, they give
Speaker 2: him communion. Well that doesn't I mean, that doesn't prove
Speaker 2: that it's the true church because they will give you
Speaker 2: the communion. His other arguments for why he's Catholic are
Speaker 2: things like miraculous meetings, of other Roman Catholics or something.
Speaker 2: I don't know how that proves Roman Catholicism. I mean,
Speaker 2: if I met a bunch of you know, Satanists in
Speaker 2: the next week with that miraculously providentially, I mean, I'm
Speaker 2: supposed to join the church state it's it's a bad
Speaker 2: series of almost charismatic level stuff, and we're actually going
Speaker 2: to see that. I think there is an element of
Speaker 2: charismatic influence and delusion that's going on with Shamoun, which
Speaker 2: is also part of the problem when we look at
Speaker 2: his bizarre idea that dust particles that fly across his
Speaker 2: camera are miraculous presences and appearances, which yes, he actually
Speaker 2: believes that. And now people are sent running from the debate.
Speaker 2: Now you say, I offered multiple times for them to
Speaker 2: come and do a timed debate, and they said, no, no,
Speaker 2: you come to Williams channel right now. Well, I was
Speaker 2: on a podcast earlier tonight, as you can see. With
Speaker 2: quite frankly, I don't have time to go to Williams's channel.
Speaker 2: But I've spent months and years in the past trying
Speaker 2: to debate and set up debates with William Albrecht, and
Speaker 2: so if they're not willing to accept a debate where
Speaker 2: there's timed responses. What's the point and what's the point
Speaker 2: of debating a person who himself can't debate or defend
Speaker 2: his positions. He's got to bring in his handler. But
Speaker 2: I told him he can come debate too, but they
Speaker 2: don't want that. Now, let me show you what I'm
Speaker 2: talking about. So here's the rest of what he says.
Speaker 3: Do tried to respect? Now barking and manifesting.
Speaker 2: Barking and manifesting, asking you to come have this discussion.
Speaker 1: Barking.
Speaker 2: So that's barking and manifesting. So you noticed that anyone
Speaker 2: who disagrees this guy thinks is demonically possessed.
Speaker 1: Now he may actually believe this.
Speaker 2: And what that suggests to me is like there's something
Speaker 2: going on, Like he actually thinks that everything that's happening
Speaker 2: is somehow like about and directed at him, as if
Speaker 2: someone couldn't just disagree with him or even just get
Speaker 2: angry with him. If somebody gets angry with you, do
Speaker 2: you immediately assume that they're demonically possessed. It's just bizarre.
Speaker 2: I mean, it's not true, but it might be a
Speaker 2: person who has a kind of a psychosis or is
Speaker 2: a dealing with certain types of bipolar issues, and I
Speaker 2: think that probably that's.
Speaker 1: What's going on.
Speaker 2: I'm not saying that to humiliate him, because I don't
Speaker 2: I'm not interested in going into this whole thing, as
Speaker 2: you're gonna see. Like when I tried to reach out
Speaker 2: again tonight to set up a debate, he just went
Speaker 2: off the hook. So I don't think this is a
Speaker 2: person that you can be reasonable with. So but and
Speaker 2: you'll see.
Speaker 3: What right here, right here, sir, So don't lie for
Speaker 3: him because he's been trying to trying to get my attention.
Speaker 3: I'm live. I'm thinking, Okay, some other time, we'll do it,
Speaker 3: all right, So no, you fangirls. Shots fired.
Speaker 2: So then he got mad because he messaged me in
Speaker 2: the middle of this and he said, why are you
Speaker 2: sending your minions into my chat? I've never sent minions
Speaker 2: into chats. I don't have the time or the energy
Speaker 2: interest in doing that. That's just the way the internet works.
Speaker 2: People will come and talk smack and then strategize and
Speaker 2: strategize and tell.
Speaker 5: Go get him, guys.
Speaker 2: I just put it publicly, right, So, at this point
Speaker 2: I posted the public question, why don't you guys both
Speaker 2: come and have a debate.
Speaker 3: It's not going to be on his time, so he
Speaker 3: can simmer it down.
Speaker 2: Now, wait a minute, Shamoon always demands everyone come to
Speaker 2: his stream, and then when I offer for both of
Speaker 2: them to come to my stream, I didn't say it
Speaker 2: had to be right then. I just said, you guys
Speaker 2: want to come on. So he's making it like I
Speaker 2: demanded at the initial offer that he has to come
Speaker 2: on right now or today.
Speaker 1: I never said that. I just said, do you.
Speaker 2: Want to set up a friendly timed response, That's all
Speaker 2: it said. I said it would be good to do
Speaker 2: it timed so that people don't talk over each other.
Speaker 2: Now he's saying, oh, he just wants attention, demanding that
Speaker 2: I do it now.
Speaker 1: There was no demand, so don't.
Speaker 3: Be lying about him.
Speaker 1: He's the one who did.
Speaker 3: I don't usually call this guy out, but I guess
Speaker 3: he's getting too big for his riches.
Speaker 2: Okay, anyway, right, so because he's got clips channels that
Speaker 2: have spread his clips, he thinks I'm jealous of him,
Speaker 2: and I have to call him out because I don't
Speaker 2: have any other way to get attention or to get
Speaker 2: an audience. So it's not like I host a giant
Speaker 2: show or write for another giant show.
Speaker 1: No, I only can get clips by fussing with him.
Speaker 3: Now it's like King of Kings and Lord of Lords.
Speaker 3: Now you're telling me this is not a demonic attack,
Speaker 3: and I'll say, he's using him. We're focusing on Christ,
Speaker 3: glorifying Christ. He manifests. But I'm glad you exposed it.
Speaker 2: So again, nothing else happened other than me asking him
Speaker 2: another question. I said, what are you getting mad about?
Speaker 2: I'm just asking you to set up a time debate,
Speaker 2: and now it's demonic manifestation. So it's almost like a
Speaker 2: cult leader where it's like dming a person during a
Speaker 2: stream and he loses his mind as if this is
Speaker 2: some giant personal attack. All I said was I disagree
Speaker 2: with your take on Protestant and Roal macalvol Trinity models.
Speaker 2: That was it.
Speaker 1: That's it.
Speaker 2: But that's all it takes is you're now demonically possessed
Speaker 2: and working to undermine him. When what I cooked you
Speaker 2: up with a fresh and fit, massive debate. But now
Speaker 2: I'm demonically possessed for daring to message you during a
Speaker 2: live stream. I mean it's just I mean, okay, I
Speaker 2: get it. He has a pet peeve that I understand
Speaker 2: this now, but why don't you just assume that, like
Speaker 2: maybe not, everybody knows that that's your pet peeve? Right
Speaker 2: to get message during a live stream.
Speaker 1: I get messages all the time.
Speaker 2: I get mad about it and cuss the people out
Speaker 2: because they messaged me.
Speaker 1: Oh dare you you?
Speaker 2: Dem Sagon sent you to message me during your laws dream?
Speaker 3: Because now shots are fired? Okay now, and you guys
Speaker 3: know I didn't shot shoot right, I didn't fire shots. Okay,
Speaker 3: but that's good now for the rest of it. If
Speaker 3: you're listening, because Satan wants us, Satan wants us to
Speaker 3: be distracted, don't be distracted. No, his fangirls came manifesting.
Speaker 3: I blocked him. Guess I guess he's like calling out William.
Speaker 2: Don't be he's lied calling out William. How is calling
Speaker 2: out William to debate a lie? That doesn't make any sense.
Speaker 3: He distracted focus because in the midst of my stream
Speaker 3: to call us out. Yeah, we're gonna drop everything, Jay,
Speaker 3: We're gonna drop Yeah, we're gonna drop you in a minute.
Speaker 2: I didn't say anything about leaving your stream to the baby.
Speaker 2: I just ask you if you'd like to set it up,
Speaker 2: So this is not true. He's acting like I demanded
Speaker 2: that he stop his stream and come to baby. It
Speaker 2: was a simple message to set up this debate or
Speaker 2: this discussion, which is the same message I sent tonight,
Speaker 2: and you'll see how.
Speaker 1: He reacted when we set it up.
Speaker 3: Don't worry about it all right.
Speaker 2: And by the way, the reason that he's acting this
Speaker 2: way is because he doesn't want this to date.
Speaker 1: He wants to poison.
Speaker 2: The well and be so nasty that I won't debate,
Speaker 2: so that he will say that I'm a coward. When
Speaker 2: if he was actually disinterested in the truth, why wouldn't
Speaker 2: he just have this discussion anyway? Why wouldn't he come
Speaker 2: and have the discussion with time responses? There was no
Speaker 2: need for all of this. But one of the reasons
Speaker 2: that this kind of person does this is that it's
Speaker 2: a way to not have the debate by being so
Speaker 2: nasty and then accuse the people who don't want to
Speaker 2: interact with you as if they're totally scared.
Speaker 1: Now you might say, oh, but Jay, you make jokes
Speaker 1: about people. Will you do this?
Speaker 2: You do that when I operate on asking people to
Speaker 2: come to a debate. It's always professional. I just simply
Speaker 2: sent very brief, very clear, precise messages, would you like
Speaker 2: to set up a debate on this? And everybody knows this.
Speaker 2: I've been doing it for years. There's no screaming, there's
Speaker 2: no meltdowns, there's no crying, there's none of this that
Speaker 2: happens in informal debates where it's open for him, where
Speaker 2: people call in to challenge me. It's different from a
Speaker 2: formal debate setting where you have time responses.
Speaker 3: Right, not on your time, take it easy. But you
Speaker 3: see here it says on his robe, and honest.
Speaker 2: There was nothing about that he has to do it
Speaker 2: on my time. It was just an ask asking him
Speaker 2: to come and do it. You could do it a
Speaker 2: week from now.
Speaker 3: Oh he has name. He has a name inscribed King
Speaker 3: of Kings and Lord of lords. So you're saying Jesus
Speaker 3: manifested by coming and disrupting a service that's about Jesus
Speaker 3: Christ and glorifying him. That's what satan your father does
Speaker 3: manifest to distract you, stupid horror. See the demons.
Speaker 2: So because someone asked him to debate in a DM,
Speaker 2: the demons are sending people and everyone's a stupid horror.
Speaker 2: It literally makes me no, It's like it makes no
Speaker 2: sense at all.
Speaker 3: Manifesting. Okay, now everyone else getting it? Everyone listening, Everyone listening.
Speaker 3: I need you to focus, get rid of these trolls now.
Speaker 3: I don't want you to get distracted. Do you guys
Speaker 3: see demonic. I'm in the midst of a session and
Speaker 3: the guy manifests good, I'm glad God exposed you. It's
Speaker 3: time to take you out first Corinthian six two to three.
Speaker 2: So that this is his attitude when someone dms him
Speaker 2: because it's a live stream, it's demonic manifestation. It's time
Speaker 2: for him to take him out. I mean, this is
Speaker 2: just literally insane. This is like a mentally unstable person.
Speaker 2: I don't like, where did I ever say anything negative,
Speaker 2: critical at all, rude or anything, But I mean it
Speaker 2: was always completely respectful to him. And he doesn't have
Speaker 2: any evidence of any of that, by the way, Like
Speaker 2: there's me talking, smack me even being rude, critical of
Speaker 2: him at all. All he has is that I told
Speaker 2: him that no one wants to interact with William Albrick,
Speaker 2: and he thinks that's a gotcha that people are scared
Speaker 2: of al Breck.
Speaker 3: He's working in Dude. Hey, Jay, your boys came to
Speaker 3: my live stream calling me out. So I'm thinking you're
Speaker 3: sending them. I'm trying to keep love with you and
Speaker 3: work with you, buddy.
Speaker 2: Tell them to so again, this weird paranoia that I'm
Speaker 2: sending people to his livestream chat. Like, first of all,
Speaker 2: you have to join his channel and wait five hours
Speaker 2: to chat anyway, Like, you can't just join the channel
Speaker 2: in chat, So I don't know where he's I mean,
Speaker 2: this is bizarre, right, It's weird.
Speaker 1: It doesn't make any sense.
Speaker 3: Stop go to my comments section. They're calling him out
Speaker 3: as if I'm afraid. Come on, Jay, keep it real
Speaker 3: between us. I got your back, dude, come on all
Speaker 3: right anyway, by zu, I know you don't have to.
Speaker 3: They're coming because they're hearing you mention it because they
Speaker 3: didn't hear it on my stream. So tell them. Stop
Speaker 3: being used of the devil. Bro anyway, gotta get back
Speaker 3: to the stream. Love you, take care.
Speaker 2: So how so I'm demonically possessed. I'm an agent of
Speaker 2: the devil. He thinks I'm sending people to a stream
Speaker 2: and then he's like, love you, bro, anyway.
Speaker 4: See the Lord dot Com.
Speaker 3: See, so he did shots fired, right, it's manifesting.
Speaker 4: Okay, good, that's.
Speaker 1: Right, right.
Speaker 2: So what I took issue with was in the stream
Speaker 2: he says that the Protestants are killing it on the
Speaker 2: Trinity because they go to the Angel the Lord in
Speaker 2: the Old Testament. And I understand that he was saying
Speaker 2: that they're doing better in that domain than the Roman
Speaker 2: Catholic apologists, who don't want to talk about the Trinity
Speaker 2: of the Old Testament because they have a pretty bad theology.
Speaker 2: But that wasn't what I was taken issue with. I'm
Speaker 2: taking issue with the idea that either the Protestant or
Speaker 2: the Roman Catholic trinitarian model are correct. I believe they're
Speaker 2: both wrong, and I think that you can demonstrate that
Speaker 2: not just in terms of the monarchia and how that's
Speaker 2: central too orthodox Trinitarian theology, especially from Constantin up On
Speaker 2: one of the Cappadocians, but also the Energy's doctrine, which
Speaker 2: is concomitant with that monarchical trinitarian doctrine of the Cappadocians.
Speaker 2: That's why the Eastern Fathers in the Eastern Councils dogmatize
Speaker 2: the Energy's doctrine. But he doesn't even know that the
Speaker 2: energy's doctrine is in the New Testament. As I'm going
Speaker 2: to show you when he starts, as he says, barking
Speaker 2: about the energy's doctrine itself.
Speaker 3: We're going to call him out to Dorian. You had
Speaker 3: me there. That's why his fangirls are manifesting. I feel
Speaker 3: bad for you Orthodox brothers and sisters, seriously.
Speaker 2: So if you're Orthodox, you're just my fan girl. Even
Speaker 2: though how does he know that the profiles asking him
Speaker 2: to debate are necessarily Orthodox, And maybe they're a bunch
Speaker 2: of Roman Catholics, maybe they're Wagner's fans, maybe they're Protestants
Speaker 2: who want to see this kind of a debate. He
Speaker 2: just assumes that people in the chat are asking him,
Speaker 2: that are asking him to debate are demonically possessed Orthodox people.
Speaker 3: Orthodox Church is a glorious church, but when you got
Speaker 3: people like this representing you, it's sad.
Speaker 2: It really is so now because someone dared to take
Speaker 2: issue with his bizarre idea that Roman Catholics, Orthodox and
Speaker 2: Protestants all have good Trinitarian theology, which doesn't make any sense,
Speaker 2: by the way, which is going to be the root
Speaker 2: of his chief mistake. The idea that there's a Apostolic
Speaker 2: Church that exists amongst a bunch of sects and different
Speaker 2: schisms is complete nonsense and doesn't exist. There is no
Speaker 2: Apostolic church that isn't a specific Apostolic church. So that
Speaker 2: will get to in a moment, but will finish this.
Speaker 3: I'm being honest with you. It's like when a past
Speaker 3: they prophet said, Luigi, if you're to judge Orthodoxy by
Speaker 3: you guys online, he would never become Orthodox.
Speaker 2: Shamoon critique David Wood because he said that you can't
Speaker 2: make you can't make your Christianity anti Islam, right, and
Speaker 2: we saw this with David Woodhu mean with Christian Prince.
Speaker 2: Christian Prince was this goofball who doesn't know anything about
Speaker 2: church history. He's never heard of Athenasians. He didn't know
Speaker 2: who Athenasius was. But the extent of his Christianity and
Speaker 2: his catechisis was just anti Islam.
Speaker 1: And you've got a lot.
Speaker 2: Of people, very low tier, very low information voters who
Speaker 2: don't know church history, they don't know the actual theology.
Speaker 2: They think that theologies is being anti Islam, and so
Speaker 2: they convert to Jesus and that's step one. That's good,
Speaker 2: but there's no Jesus ultimately without the church. Jesus set
Speaker 2: up a church, not three thousand different conflicting ones, and
Speaker 2: not five different rival quote Apostolic ones like he thinks.
Speaker 2: And the amazing thing is that he even admits over
Speaker 2: and over in his streams that the reason he's not
Speaker 2: Orthodox is precisely that he would have to start over
Speaker 2: and be catechized. And because the Roman Catholics give him communion,
Speaker 2: but that doesn't prove, that doesn't show that it's true.
Speaker 2: Just because they give you communion, that's a terrible argument
Speaker 2: and justification and other sort of emotive reasons that are
Speaker 2: not good reasons, which again I think goes back to
Speaker 2: this almost charismatic influence that we see with Sam Chamun.
Speaker 2: I'm just over here manifest and Doll, I'm just.
Speaker 1: Manifest and dog, okay, stop manifested.
Speaker 2: And the problem is that he's not catechized. Okay, So
Speaker 2: he just learned about Apostolic succession and the post Apostolic
Speaker 2: fathers not too long ago, right, he was doing a
Speaker 2: commentary on the stream that Trent Horn did. Trent Horn
Speaker 2: talked about the Apostolic fathers in his debate and showed
Speaker 2: that they teach Apostolic succession. So when Shamun reviews that,
Speaker 2: he says, this is blowing my mind. This is blowing
Speaker 2: my mind. So you didn't know that the abstotic fathers
Speaker 2: have Apostolic succession.
Speaker 1: I mean, this is like basics, right.
Speaker 2: So you got a person who learned a lot of
Speaker 2: the Bible as a Protestant, and learned a lot of
Speaker 2: Islamic arguments as a Protestant, and was a very proficient
Speaker 2: even as a Calvinist debater against Islam. But Christianity is
Speaker 2: not Calvinism. It's not Protestantism, and it's not your made
Speaker 2: up church of apostolic that exists among a bunch of
Speaker 2: sex and splits and schisms. And he even defends mar Maury,
Speaker 2: who created his own denomination. It doesn't make any sense.
Speaker 2: So why is this. He doesn't know anything about the
Speaker 2: divine energies, He doesn't know anything about Christology, he doesn't
Speaker 2: know anything about the Patristic teaching and the Acumenical Council's teachings,
Speaker 2: and so he's wandered into papism because he thinks that
Speaker 2: that's gonna make it easy for him and it's going
Speaker 2: to give him a broader reach amongst the so called
Speaker 2: Christian YouTube.
Speaker 1: Audience or whatever.
Speaker 2: Well, you can make that decision if you want. But
Speaker 2: the problem is that the papacy itself is a spiritual delusion.
Speaker 2: And I'm going to show you that we're going to do.
Speaker 2: We're gonna look at William Aubrecks's terrible argumentation about the papacy,
Speaker 2: how low tier it is. But again, the key point
Speaker 2: is that sam Chimun has no teaching blessing. No one
Speaker 2: becomes a teacher that's self appointed. It doesn't exist. In fact,
Speaker 2: even in the Roman Catholic world, it's not really supposed
Speaker 2: to exist. I mean, in today's Romancatholic world, nobody cares
Speaker 2: about it. They can do whatever they want. But you
Speaker 2: cannot be a self appointed teacher. You have to be
Speaker 2: cold to teach or given a blessing to teach. And
Speaker 2: this is a basic principle Hebrews five.
Speaker 1: As you guys know, for.
Speaker 2: Every high priest taken from among men, is appointed for
Speaker 2: men and things that pertain to God. He may offer
Speaker 2: both sacrifices gifts and sacrifices for sins. He can have
Speaker 2: compassion on those who are ignorant goes stray because he
Speaker 2: himself is also subject to weaknesses.
Speaker 1: But because of this.
Speaker 2: He's required as for the people, so as for himself
Speaker 2: to offer sacrifices for sins. No one takes this honor
Speaker 2: of priesthood and teaching, etc. On themselves, but they are
Speaker 2: cold to it. What bishop, priest or authority has actually
Speaker 2: called Sam Shamun to his parachurch ministry. Now I don't
Speaker 2: personally have a big deal with people debating or this
Speaker 2: or that. The problem is that Sam Chimun presents himself
Speaker 2: as having this ministry right. And it doesn't matter that
Speaker 2: you defeat Muslims in a debate. That's not what makes
Speaker 2: the ministry valid. The question is who appointed you to
Speaker 2: have ministry? Who appointed you.
Speaker 1: To have that?
Speaker 2: You have to be under some authority. But nobody knows
Speaker 2: what priest, bishop, or what blessing from the episcopacy was
Speaker 2: given to Sam Chamun to have a public ministry. It's
Speaker 2: just self appointed, like many of the online YouTube crowd.
Speaker 2: Just like Christian Prince who has no church, who has
Speaker 2: no blessing, Sam Schimun's church is the one that he's
Speaker 2: invented in his head. That is quote Apostolic meaning Oriental,
Speaker 2: Assyrian Church of the East, Roman Catholic and Orthodox, and
Speaker 2: apparently also many Protestants that he just happens to like
Speaker 2: that week. They're all somehow part of the Apostolic Church.
Speaker 2: But if you go back to the Niceno Constantpolitan Creed,
Speaker 2: when the Kappadocians who wrote the Creed and compile that
Speaker 2: creed put one Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church, what do
Speaker 2: you think they meant? Do you think that when they
Speaker 2: wrote that they meant the Novationists. Did they mean the
Speaker 2: schismatics of that time? Did they mean the Eunomians? They
Speaker 2: meant that there is one canonical visible church structure, and
Speaker 2: that one Holy Catholic Apostolic Church is the only one,
Speaker 2: and the church fathers unanimously clearly teach that any heresy
Speaker 2: or schism is a leaving of that body. There are
Speaker 2: no schisms in a literal sense, in the sense of
Speaker 2: two churches churches out of communion right excommunicating one another,
Speaker 2: that are still the church.
Speaker 1: It doesn't exist.
Speaker 2: And so because he doesn't understand Christology, he has a
Speaker 2: Nestorian ecclesiology, where Christ exists amongst divided excommunicated thousand plus
Speaker 2: year splits is Christ divided? Paul says, So Sam Schmoun
Speaker 2: has a Calvinist invisible church ecclesiology. Still, he's an ecclesiological heretic.
Speaker 2: That's the main problem right here, because for him to
Speaker 2: admit that there is a single canonical church that he
Speaker 2: would be under the authority of would mean that he'd
Speaker 2: have to be recatechized, and he just simply doesn't want
Speaker 2: to do that. So it is at root of pride issue.
Speaker 2: And I'm going to tell you that you shouldn't listen
Speaker 2: to him, not because he's wrong about Islam or something
Speaker 2: like that, but he's just a self appointed guy who
Speaker 2: claims to have sort of miraculous weird I don't even
Speaker 2: know what it is like miracles happen that confirm his
Speaker 2: quote ministry. What are the miracles and things that he
Speaker 2: claims prove his ministry? Dust flying across his screen what
Speaker 2: he calls orbs.
Speaker 3: Bless our brother, preserve him in a family, and healed
Speaker 3: our hearts in us phenomena watch it, he answered the
Speaker 3: way I will.
Speaker 2: Now, the funny thing is that I didn't even see
Speaker 2: a dust orb in that video. But again he thinks
Speaker 2: that dust orbs. He's not joking. By the way, this
Speaker 2: is actually on his channel and he's got multiple ORB videos.
Speaker 1: Let's see another one.
Speaker 2: While this ORB is incredible, So a dust particle flies by.
Speaker 2: He thinks that angels are flying around in his dirty
Speaker 2: ass kitchen right with his dunkin donuts.
Speaker 1: Nasty ass.
Speaker 2: The reason that you have health issues is your diet, dude,
Speaker 2: all your dunkin Donuts, garbage food you got in there,
Speaker 2: and your cereal boxes or whatever garbage you're eating.
Speaker 1: That's why you have diet issues. Bro.
Speaker 2: It's not doing cardio. But he's too boomer. He doesn't
Speaker 2: even know about diets. He thinks doing cardios. What makes
Speaker 2: you thin? No, dude, it's none of that. Oh look
Speaker 2: another orb. This is a winged ORB according to Sam Chamun.
Speaker 3: Okay, I'll be the bad copy.
Speaker 2: So winged ORB a piece of dust or a reflection.
Speaker 2: Maybe that dirty ass apartment just needs to be cleaned up, bro,
Speaker 2: Maybe you need to vacuum that dirty ass apartment. What's
Speaker 2: more likely that there's a jos flying around that nasty
Speaker 2: kitchen or he just needs to vacuum. What's more likely?
Speaker 2: These aren't jokes either way. Like he actually thinks here's
Speaker 2: his fan base.
Speaker 1: I saw one of them live.
Speaker 2: I saw one of them orbs live when you was
Speaker 2: at that hotel.
Speaker 1: God is surely with you. You look at this chick
Speaker 1: presence of angels. The veil is thin or almost home.
Speaker 2: So yeah, this is what we're talking about here, orbs
Speaker 2: miraculous dust, orbs that proved the ministry of Sam Chamun.
Speaker 3: All right, anyway, he's manifesting because I guess he wants
Speaker 3: our numbers and our fame.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I don't have Sam Chamun fame.
Speaker 1: I'm jealous.
Speaker 2: Later on he'll say that I wrote a conspiracy book
Speaker 2: because I don't have enough money. I don't write books
Speaker 2: for money, dude, Like the books don't make any money.
Speaker 3: Yeah see, So there you go. So you made a
Speaker 3: community post. You see see that, Arthur Christos, There you go,
Speaker 3: you guys man, you do a lot of damage to
Speaker 3: the church. Okay, now another one.
Speaker 1: What church Sam?
Speaker 2: Would that be the Assyrian Church of the East. Would
Speaker 2: that be the Anglican sect? Would that be the Roman
Speaker 2: Catholic Communion? Would that be the Coptic to the Tawahda?
Speaker 2: What is the church? So you see, the whole point
Speaker 2: is that he doesn't have the church. He's missed the
Speaker 2: very thing that what three weeks ago when he talked
Speaker 2: about the Trent Horns, like he just learned that the
Speaker 2: post topsuck fathers teach I saw a succession, or that
Speaker 2: he had never seen these quotes before. So what are
Speaker 2: you going to do when you get to the energies
Speaker 2: in the sixth Council when you learn that.
Speaker 3: Let's hammer this Isaiah forty See, the Lord God comes
Speaker 3: with Mike and his arm rules for him. So you
Speaker 3: can't stop. Guys, Look, you can't stop. He's got a
Speaker 3: chim in say, because he wants to be used of
Speaker 3: the devil. You see, guys, watch, I can't stop, and
Speaker 3: I'm always listening.
Speaker 2: I want to be used as the double Dead. The
Speaker 2: only reason I would contact you is because I want
Speaker 2: to be used of the.
Speaker 3: Devil, Like because he wants to be used of the devil.
Speaker 3: This is crazy, ha ha, No, Jay, you're not manifesting.
Speaker 2: I mean, look at this guy. I asked him in
Speaker 2: the comments. I was like, what do you mean I'm manifesting.
Speaker 2: I was like, because I asked you a question.
Speaker 3: Yeah, keep manifesting. I know I'm your in your head.
Speaker 3: Take it easy. I know I own you. In time,
Speaker 3: I'll do to you what I did on your discord
Speaker 3: with the cannon.
Speaker 2: You didn't do anything on the on the cannon. You
Speaker 2: actually believe the position that I argued. Now, so he's
Speaker 2: referring to this this discord argument we had about the cannon,
Speaker 2: which is ironic because he now believes the position I
Speaker 2: was arguing for. He doesn't believe the Protestant position on
Speaker 2: the canon, so he thinks that he won this stupid
Speaker 2: argument from seven years ago that he now believes the
Speaker 2: opposite of the thing I was arguing. He was arguing
Speaker 2: the Protestant canon. I was arguing the Orthodox Canon. He
Speaker 2: now believes the Catholic Orthodox Canon. So this is nonsense, patience,
Speaker 2: all right, anyway, this is actually I think this is
Speaker 2: literally an insane person. I actually think he's just literally
Speaker 2: just nuts. And the reason I say that's not because
Speaker 2: I'm mad or that I like when I play you
Speaker 2: what he says about the Energies, it makes no sense
Speaker 2: because he argued for the Theophanes against Wagner and the Tomists,
Speaker 2: and then he's going to make fun of the Energies.
Speaker 2: It's like he doesn't even know that the only way
Speaker 2: to have the theophany is is the energy doctrine. It's weird, yep.
Speaker 2: I don't think I think that there's like something off
Speaker 2: with this guy, like he's off. He doesn't even see that.
Speaker 2: Seven years ago you were arguing the Protestant canon. I
Speaker 2: was arguing the Orthodox Catholic canon. You now have that position.
Speaker 2: How did you defeat me in that discord debate?
Speaker 3: It's stupid, be radical, Thomass. Okay, see the Lord God
Speaker 3: comes with Mike and here we go, guys. Yeah, I'm manifesting.
Speaker 1: Guys.
Speaker 3: Look here you go. See every time see tell me
Speaker 3: sing's not working. Brother, I'm I'm un alive.
Speaker 4: Man.
Speaker 3: Here you go, Jay, here you want.
Speaker 2: Here, here's the demonic possession. I'm always straight up, I'm manifesting.
Speaker 2: I'm asking you to debate, and I said, we're going dude,
Speaker 2: I mean that's just insane.
Speaker 3: All right, Brother? I love you, Jay, I love you, Jay,
Speaker 3: swear I love you. I love you.
Speaker 1: Matt to notice this perform of nonsense? Does he even?
Speaker 2: It's like there's two different sam Chamuns, Right, There's like
Speaker 2: the sam Shamun that loves you and is patient and
Speaker 2: kind of nice with you and then suddenly there's this
Speaker 2: like one is screaming and cussing and like calling you.
Speaker 1: This and that and again.
Speaker 2: The issue is that you can't actually overcome a lot
Speaker 2: of these issues without the aid of the grace that's
Speaker 2: uncreated in the Orthodox Church. So the sad part is
Speaker 2: that the very thing that he is mocking, I'm going
Speaker 2: to show you where he starts mocking the divine energies.
Speaker 2: That's the very thing that would heal him and that
Speaker 2: he needs. But that's the thing that he's gonna mock,
Speaker 2: which is really weird and bizarre.
Speaker 3: Because of the post you posted, brother, I love you, man,
Speaker 3: I swear I do love you. You posted that post because
Speaker 3: you must.
Speaker 2: So I'm demonically possessed. I'm like totally jealous of him.
Speaker 2: Never said anything bad about him ever. All I did
Speaker 2: was ask him to set up a public debate, which,
Speaker 2: by the way, we've already been talking about doing right,
Speaker 2: setting up something with me, him and Albrecht and other
Speaker 2: people for months. And I'm the worst. Oh, but I
Speaker 2: love you and you're really great and by the way,
Speaker 2: been respectful for you. Blah blah blah. It's just it
Speaker 2: doesn't make any sense.
Speaker 3: I said, you won't stop texting me. Brother, I'm in
Speaker 3: a live stream, and.
Speaker 2: You don't have to answer your phone on a live stream.
Speaker 2: Nobody is forcing you to debate or answer your phone
Speaker 2: on live stream. So this radical swing between as you
Speaker 2: can see here, between I love you, I love you, bro,
Speaker 2: You're the great yeah, blah blah blah, We've been great
Speaker 2: friends blah bah blah to just pure hatred. That's bipolar,
Speaker 2: that's a manic bipolar.
Speaker 3: And the guys are coming here and say, when do
Speaker 3: you go to bate jay For the love of our
Speaker 3: god Jay, let me finish, brother, let me finish what
Speaker 3: I'm doing. I know you're listening. Let me get to
Speaker 3: my stuff. Let me get ahold of William because you
Speaker 3: guys the experts on.
Speaker 2: So somebody's saying that Sam Shamun has talked about his
Speaker 2: mental health issues. I wasn't even aware of this, so
Speaker 2: I don't know what this is new to me. What
Speaker 2: exactly does he say? I don't even know what are
Speaker 2: his issues. Somebody that actually knows, can you enlighten me?
Speaker 2: Because that would actually make things a lot more sensible.
Speaker 2: I would like if he does have actual bipolar issues
Speaker 2: and medicine that he takes. Maybe that would make more sense.
Speaker 2: I would understand these issues.
Speaker 3: I'm going to be learning as we're going to. Please
Speaker 3: be patient, brother, I love you. I swear I'll even
Speaker 3: go to Turkey and get a hair transplant if it'll
Speaker 3: make you happy. So I don't look as fat and
Speaker 3: ugly and I don't have a gay list like.
Speaker 2: I mean, I've never commented on his appearance or said
Speaker 2: anything negative about him. But you notice that he immediately
Speaker 2: starts talking about this like there's some sort of rivalry
Speaker 2: or in be like because I have hair.
Speaker 1: Or something I don't. I don't know what he'd like.
Speaker 2: Maybe bald people are just typically rage induced, like they're
Speaker 2: mad at the people that have hair, Like who even cares? Dude,
Speaker 2: don't care whether you got hair or whether you're bald,
Speaker 2: It doesn't matter to me. But he's He's brought this
Speaker 2: up a lot, and I've always just took it like
Speaker 2: maybe he's joking, but maybe he actually like has a thing,
Speaker 2: like he feels what intimidated because people have hair.
Speaker 3: I don't know, Jimmy White, And I promise you I
Speaker 3: won't wear Cosby sweaters. I promise you.
Speaker 1: Well, let me finish.
Speaker 2: Please let me finish, Broker, nobody's making you look at
Speaker 2: your phone like all you gotta do is like turn
Speaker 2: your screen off or put the phone in the other room.
Speaker 2: Like what are you talking about?
Speaker 3: He's done broke me, man? It done broke me man,
Speaker 3: bro he doesn't broke me man, by the way is
Speaker 3: avery life?
Speaker 4: He breaks were?
Speaker 1: All right?
Speaker 4: He breaks me man.
Speaker 3: I don't know what the hell's going on? Guys, what's
Speaker 3: going on this this lent season?
Speaker 5: Bro? What is going on?
Speaker 3: Do you see the attacks? Damn?
Speaker 5: Can I gotta break?
Speaker 1: All right? So that's enough of that. I mean, I
Speaker 1: don't even what is what? What is he talking about? Attacks?
Speaker 2: Like asking you to come and have a debate in
Speaker 2: a timed way. It's not an attack. So it's just
Speaker 2: weird man, bizarre. Now I want to go over to
Speaker 2: this because this was so Later on tonight, after all this,
Speaker 2: I sent him another message that was not rude. It
Speaker 2: was just straight up like do you want to come
Speaker 2: on and set this up? And here's his response.
Speaker 4: We're gonna call you all. We're gonna get you. Don't
Speaker 4: worry boy, Now, girl, get some more energies.
Speaker 2: They will help you get more energies.
Speaker 1: Maybe they'll help you. It's like he doesn't even.
Speaker 4: Like I said, thanks for the receipt, queer bait. I'm
Speaker 4: gonna show them who ran from William? Down? Girl, ape down,
Speaker 4: keep following. Good, We're gonna call you out. We're gonna
Speaker 4: get you. Don't worry about it. Down girl, get some
Speaker 4: more energies.
Speaker 1: Maybe will help you get more energies.
Speaker 3: You like I said, thanks for the received queer bait.
Speaker 4: I'm gonna show them who ran from William. Damn girl,
Speaker 4: kelb a note down, Keep following.
Speaker 2: We're gonna call So there you go. So the the
Speaker 2: energies he thinks are just something.
Speaker 1: That you make fun of. It's like a joke.
Speaker 2: Maybe your divine energies will help you out. Does he
Speaker 2: not know that this is fundamental to the New Testament,
Speaker 2: the doctrine of the divine energies. And for those who
Speaker 2: are serious about the stuff, you could read an excellent
Speaker 2: book on that, which is doctor David Bradshaw's book, Divine
Speaker 2: Energies and Divine Action, and he has a great section
Speaker 2: where he talks about that the energy's doctrine is essentially
Speaker 2: something that comes from Scripture. It's not invented by the Cappadocians.
Speaker 2: It's not invented by Palamas, it's not invented by.
Speaker 1: Maximus the Confessor.
Speaker 2: The doctrine of energies is literally the Pauline New Testament
Speaker 2: terminology innergaya erginon inergenon for how God is at work
Speaker 2: in us and what we partake of, right, and he.
Speaker 1: Thinks it's something to laugh at.
Speaker 2: It doesn't make any sense, which makes me think that
Speaker 2: there's some sort of like bipolar manic sort of episode,
Speaker 2: which was triggered because initially asked him in DM to
Speaker 2: do a debate that made him upset, and then when
Speaker 2: he started saying that was demonically possessed and all this
Speaker 2: weird stuff, then I said it publicly on the community post.
Speaker 2: So as you can see, Uh, inner gaya is the
Speaker 2: working and the efficiency, uh, the superhuman power of God
Speaker 2: in time and space in us. Whether it's Ephesians three, seven,
Speaker 2: Colossians two, twelve, Colossians one twenty nine, Fijians one nineteen,
Speaker 2: Fijians four, sixteen, Philippians three twenty one, second, Thessalonians two nine,
Speaker 2: second Dessolians two eleven. Uh, And there are other derivations
Speaker 2: of the word too, So there's also dunamas or power
Speaker 2: and dunamas is also an equally important New Testament terminology
Speaker 2: use that is basically synonymous with the Orthodox doctrine of
Speaker 2: the uncreated energies of God. Now he doesn't know the
Speaker 2: Church fathers at all other than quote mining, so he's
Speaker 2: not even aware of that. Basil's Letter two thirty four
Speaker 2: is a classic text outlining what the Patristic doctrine of
Speaker 2: the energies is. This is again everybody should know this.
Speaker 2: If you're Orthodox, let me make it bigger.
Speaker 1: So he thinks it's funny. I think that you just
Speaker 1: laugh at it. It's like you just the energy's.
Speaker 2: Doctrine is a joke or something, and hahaha, get your
Speaker 2: energies to come help you. Queer eight right, that's what
Speaker 2: he says to me, which, by the way, I'm married,
Speaker 2: so is he married?
Speaker 1: Calling me? I don't understand.
Speaker 2: Do you worship what you know or what you don't know?
Speaker 2: If I say that I worship what I know, they
Speaker 2: immediately say, what is the essence the object of worship?
Speaker 2: This is talking about the Eunomians. Then Youomians thought you
Speaker 2: could know and see and perceive and define the divine
Speaker 2: essence I confess that I'm ignorant of the essence. They
Speaker 2: turn to me and they say, so you worship what
Speaker 2: you don't know. I answer that the word to know
Speaker 2: has many meanings. You heard me say this a lot.
Speaker 2: We say that we know the greatness of God, his wisdom,
Speaker 2: his powers, goodness, his providence, and the justness of his judgments.
Speaker 2: But judgment but.
Speaker 1: Not his essence.
Speaker 2: The question therefore, only put forth for the sake of dispute, right,
Speaker 2: is that we do not know the essence. But the
Speaker 2: operations come down to us. And that's the point of
Speaker 2: Basil's apologetic Here, these operations or attributes or energies. And
Speaker 2: when Basil writes this, the term he uses is inner gaya,
Speaker 2: the energies. He says, the inner gaya come down to us,
Speaker 2: and those are the attributes or the operations. Right, And
Speaker 2: in fact he even rebukes what you hear the Roman
Speaker 2: Catholics and the Thomas teach. Are all of these terms
Speaker 2: just names of essence? Besil says, that would be a reductio.
Speaker 2: Is there the same mutual force and his loving kindness,
Speaker 2: and his justice and his creative power, that they're all
Speaker 2: just names of essence? For they confess that there's a
Speaker 2: distinction between the essence and one of the attributes enumerated.
Speaker 2: The operations are various. He says that even the Unomians
Speaker 2: confess there's a distinction between the essence and the attributes.
Speaker 2: The operations are various, but the essence is simple. Operations
Speaker 2: is innergaia. We know God from his energies, but we
Speaker 2: do not partake to approach near his essence. There you go,
Speaker 2: And what does sam Chamun think about the energies? So
Speaker 2: the divine energies a fundamental New Testament doctrine.
Speaker 1: What does he think.
Speaker 2: You get more energies?
Speaker 1: Maybe they'll help you, all right?
Speaker 2: So uh, final point then with him is just simply
Speaker 2: that for him, there's no there's no Apostolic Church. In reality,
Speaker 2: there's an invisible Calvinist, invisible church that exists amongst all
Speaker 2: the ones that he calls Apostolic. That so called Apostolic
Speaker 2: church has no unified teaching on Christology, the energies, or
Speaker 2: any of the other crucial doctrines of the first thousand
Speaker 2: years of Christianity. In fact, in his mind, you could
Speaker 2: go to an Anglican church that doesn't believe in energies
Speaker 2: onncreative grace. He could go to a Monophysite church that
Speaker 2: says something totally different, and you go to an Orthodox church.
Speaker 1: They're all the church, but there.
Speaker 2: Is no such thing as his made up church. Number two,
Speaker 2: His position doesn't make any sense if he's gonna mock
Speaker 2: and make fun of energies, when this was his whole
Speaker 2: point about rejecting the Thomists. The Thomasts were arguing that
Speaker 2: the Angel of the Lord has to be a created
Speaker 2: hologram or a created being an angel, and so he
Speaker 2: saw that theophanies a theophanies. Okay, but you don't have
Speaker 2: theophanies without the essence sentery distinction. He doesn't even know this.
Speaker 2: So this is a person who doesn't know any Orthodox theology,
Speaker 2: is not catechized, he has no teaching, no authority, no blessing.
Speaker 2: So he's basically just still a Protestant.
Speaker 1: Is the issue.
Speaker 2: And if you come to Orthodoxy, one of the things
Speaker 2: you have to learn is that it takes many years
Speaker 2: to get healed from Protestantism and Calvinism. And of course
Speaker 2: he comes out of a Calvinist background. So there's no
Speaker 2: true church in his position. He has an historian in
Speaker 2: visible church ecclesiology. There's no consistent, coherent doctrine of Theophanes
Speaker 2: because he says that the energies are something to make
Speaker 2: fun of, which he doesn't understand is the only way
Speaker 2: to have Theophanes. There's no bishop or authority above him
Speaker 2: that keeps him in check or calls him out or
Speaker 2: has given him a blessing to have a quote ministry. Okay,
Speaker 2: and I'm talking about debating. He himself says it's a ministry.
Speaker 2: And so he's still not catechized properly as an Orthodox person.
Speaker 2: He went directly from anti Islam to now I'm suddenly
Speaker 2: made up Catholic church apologist ministry online. So he's in
Speaker 2: the same position as James White of self appointed public
Speaker 2: teacher with no authority or oversight. And five, he has
Speaker 2: bad reasons for remaining a Roman Catholic. They're all personal,
Speaker 2: subjective reasons that he feels there's orbs that are surrounding
Speaker 2: him and that's telling him this and that, And he
Speaker 2: has miraculous meetings with Roman Catholics telling him that he
Speaker 2: needs to be Roman Catholic. And you know he feels
Speaker 2: this and that those are not good reasons. Well, I
Speaker 2: can have communion at the Catholic Church and the Orthodox
Speaker 2: won't give it to me. Well, maybe you need to
Speaker 2: be catechized and start the process, but that would require
Speaker 2: humility and abjuration of errors, and so you understand that
Speaker 2: what's the root issue here. The root issue is that
Speaker 2: you can't make up your own online church. You have
Speaker 2: to be under authority and you have to go through
Speaker 2: the process of being healed and have a change in
Speaker 2: your noetic faculties to be opened up to this new
Speaker 2: theology which has only had through the sacraments. And you
Speaker 2: cannot keep hatred and anger from your Calvinist days as
Speaker 2: your modus operandi of the Orthodox Church. Doesn't mean you
Speaker 2: can't debate people, but the erratic, weird manifestations display some
Speaker 2: kind of healing that's needed and that can only happen
Speaker 2: through having a spiritual Father that holds you in check
Speaker 2: and the sacraments.
Speaker 1: In the Orthodox Church.
Speaker 2: That's it, And this is why Roman Catholicism doesn't provide
Speaker 2: this healing. Roman Catholicism doesn't even have a noose doctrine.
Speaker 2: They don't believe in the heart. There's just the intellect
Speaker 2: and the body. So he's unknowingly gone into a thing
Speaker 2: that ironically is the very opposite of the theology that
Speaker 2: he's been arguing for the last however many decades or years.
Speaker 2: He doesn't even understand that Roman Catholic dogrine dogma. And
Speaker 2: he thinks this because he's listening to an idiot. He
Speaker 2: thinks that when Albrich tells him, he doesn't have to
Speaker 2: believe this, or he can twist this and interpret it
Speaker 2: in some other way.
Speaker 1: No, no, you don't understand.
Speaker 2: And I've sent him this the issues about your attitude
Speaker 2: in Roman Catholicism that you have to submit to the magisterium.
Speaker 1: Magisterium is not what you think it is.
Speaker 2: So they're all going to be Protestants him and allbright
Speaker 2: when they go into reading the magisterial texts and say.
Speaker 1: Well, I have to accept that. I don't have to
Speaker 1: do this because I've already been down this road. I've
Speaker 1: done the.
Speaker 2: Roman Catholic thing. I know how it works, I know
Speaker 2: all of this Roman Catholic nonsense inside and out. The
Speaker 2: Church regards with esteem the Muslims. Does that sound like
Speaker 2: sam Schimud? They adore the One God adoration in Catholic theology.
Speaker 2: He doesn't even know this is a term of worship
Speaker 2: the one God that lives and subsists in himself, merciful
Speaker 2: and all powerful, the creator of having an earth. So
Speaker 2: notice that the very thing that he's argued all these
Speaker 2: years that Islam is Allah is the devil, Allah is all,
Speaker 2: Allah is all the demon God. Sam Schmud has said
Speaker 2: this a million times now. He's putting himself under the authority,
Speaker 2: supposedly of a church that officially and dogmatically teaches that
Speaker 2: Muslims and Christians adore the same one true God. In fact,
Speaker 2: Muslims take pains to submit to God in his decrees,
Speaker 2: just like Abraham did. So Muslims have the faith of Abraham,
Speaker 2: according to Nostratate three. He doesn't know the Roman Catholic
Speaker 2: dogmatic magister. He hasn't read Vatican Two, he hasn't read
Speaker 2: the Council Trent, he hasn't read Denzinger.
Speaker 1: He doesn't know any of this stuff.
Speaker 2: And I've been trying to tell him for a few
Speaker 2: years now, warning him about this.
Speaker 1: Doesn't care.
Speaker 2: He would rather yell at Muslims on the Internet than
Speaker 2: actually learn what the Roman Catholic positions actually are, and
Speaker 2: then fall back on Albrecht, who literally looks like a
Speaker 2: gay leather daddy biker guy. I mean, you can't make
Speaker 2: this up. H I mean, look at this, dude. It
Speaker 2: looks like a biker daddy, right, like leather daddy. There's
Speaker 2: a certain picture I was looking for. He did a
Speaker 2: livestream recently where they used like an AI picture, which
Speaker 2: I'm he thought. I think he thought it looked really cool,
Speaker 2: but it actually looks like a leather daddy.
Speaker 1: I'll show what I'm talking about. Oh, I don't see it.
Speaker 1: But he should be.
Speaker 2: He should be like the pastor of like a biker
Speaker 2: church or something, you know what I mean.
Speaker 1: That's like, that's his vibe.
Speaker 2: And look, we know Albert doesn't know anything about philosophy,
Speaker 2: doesn't anything about metaphysics. All he does is bark about
Speaker 2: I'm using their terminology, bark, bark, bark. All he does
Speaker 2: is bark about church history and the papacy and what mary.
Speaker 1: That's like, it's the only things he talks about.
Speaker 2: So we're going to get into some of this defending
Speaker 2: the papacy with our favorite over here is this loft
Speaker 2: dog with our favorite loft dog. But before we do that,
Speaker 2: one to remind you that it's not just no stratat
Speaker 2: that talks about this relationship. It's also lumin Gentem sixteen.
Speaker 2: So both of these texts are dogmatic official Vatican two teachings.
Speaker 2: And if you're wondering why the manifestations that you're seeing,
Speaker 2: the real manifesting is because you can't accept these contradictory
Speaker 2: positions and not go insane. Roman Catholics, I literally believe
Speaker 2: they actually go insane the more that they know and
Speaker 2: understand and are exposed to what the papal teaching and
Speaker 2: position actually is. And it says here the plan of
Speaker 2: salvation also includes those that acknowledge the Creator, the first
Speaker 2: of whom are the Muslims who profess to hold the
Speaker 2: faith of Abraham and along with us, adore the One
Speaker 2: and Merciful God. Now notice in the NO text it's
Speaker 2: said that they do submit to God's decree just like Abraham.
Speaker 2: Because Roman Catholics say, well, it doesn't say they have it,
Speaker 2: says they profess to have it.
Speaker 3: No.
Speaker 2: In Roman Catholic theology, adoration is a worship term. So
Speaker 2: Muslims worship the One True God, and that's all premised
Speaker 2: on natural theology in the Roman Catholic Church. Roman Church
Speaker 2: which has dogmatized here, for example, this generic theism of
Speaker 2: an Old Testament Unitarian God. That's how they came to
Speaker 2: this conclusion. This is how the papacy has built an
Speaker 2: Abrahamic faith Center in Abu Dhabi, which has already opened,
Speaker 2: where Islam, Judaism and Christianity all can gather in terms
Speaker 2: of human fraternity in Abu Dhabi to honor the One
Speaker 2: Living God, the very thing that Noser Tate three in
Speaker 2: Lumgentium sixteen.
Speaker 1: Say.
Speaker 2: Now, if this doesn't tell you that this church no
Speaker 2: longer professes the trinitarian theology of the first thousand years
Speaker 2: of Christianity and the Old and New Testaments, there's really
Speaker 2: nothing else that would convince you.
Speaker 1: The problem in Rome. And it's not just well that
Speaker 1: doesn't count. It's not dogma. No, Actually, Vatican two is dogma.
Speaker 2: Do you know that any Catholic church that you go
Speaker 2: to in the world you are expected to believe Vatican Two.
Speaker 2: There's no Roman Catholic churches that will tell you Vatican
Speaker 2: Two is optional. In fact, the Catholic Catechism, the Catechism
Speaker 2: of the Catholic Church, is filled with citations from Vatican Two.
Speaker 2: Why would that be optional? On what basis is it optional.
Speaker 2: It's not optional. You don't have an option to believe
Speaker 2: it or not. In fact, there are five places in
Speaker 2: Catholic dogma that tell you not only do you have
Speaker 2: to believe the ex cathedral statements, you also have to
Speaker 2: believe all the things that are normative ordinary teaching in
Speaker 2: the Church. And even if you think it's wrong, even
Speaker 2: if it's not quote infallible, you're supposed to submit to it.
Speaker 2: With Docility's canon law on the Romancally Church. But this
Speaker 2: is exactly why these people's pope, including sam Shimun's new
Speaker 2: spiritual leader, goes in praise towards Mecca.
Speaker 1: In the mosques.
Speaker 2: And not just crazy Frank Benedict the sixteenth the so
Speaker 2: called trad did the exact same thing. So imagine trying
Speaker 2: to convince people for however many decades of how bad
Speaker 2: Islam is, and then you're going into an entity whose
Speaker 2: infallible divine terrorism head goes in praise in moss towards
Speaker 2: Mecca and builds giant Abu Dhabi multi faith centers based
Speaker 2: around the premise that Muslims, Jews, and Christians all worship
Speaker 2: the same generic God. There's a reason why the Catholic
Speaker 2: apologists suck at defending the Trinity. It's not just because
Speaker 2: of their ignorance, it's actually because they're being consistent with
Speaker 2: your dogma. So there's not really a need for debate
Speaker 2: with these people because they're not recognizing and don't have
Speaker 2: discernment to see what is obvious departure. There's nobody in
Speaker 2: the first thousand years of Christianity that would do anything
Speaker 2: like this. And in fact, the ancient canons say you
Speaker 2: cannot pray in the synagogues or in the heterodox churches.
Speaker 1: Church is so called.
Speaker 2: What does that tell you about Sam Schimun's made up
Speaker 2: position that all the Apostolic churches are the church when
Speaker 2: the canons of the councils say you can't go and
Speaker 2: pray in the temples of the schismatics and the heretics
Speaker 2: and in the synagogues. Now beyond that, the ancient canons themselves,
Speaker 2: from of every of the seven Ecumenical councils, literally contains
Speaker 2: canons that contradict Vatican one. And I'll give you this
Speaker 2: article here that shows all of the canons that contradict
Speaker 2: Vatican one. Now, the Document on Human Fraternity, this is
Speaker 2: the document that Francis drew up that is the basis
Speaker 2: for the Abu Dhabi Multi Faith Center. The entire document
Speaker 2: is nothing but social justice warrior, one world religion nonsense.
Speaker 2: So this is again, this is what these people are
Speaker 2: signing on for. This is what Albrecht and all these
Speaker 2: people are trying to convince you to join the thing
Speaker 2: that Francis runs, which is already essentially put into law
Speaker 2: church law, the very principles that especially Shamun has spent
Speaker 2: decades arguing against. So there's a spiritual delusion that's at work.
Speaker 1: That's the root of this problem.
Speaker 2: You see, It's not an intellectual issue. And in fact,
Speaker 2: the Vatican itself in their documents when it comes to acumenism,
Speaker 2: their documents themselves admit and the very thing that the
Speaker 2: Orthodox have said the entire time. This is the Francis approved.
Speaker 4: Ch.
Speaker 2: Eighty document, and it admits right there that the Bishop
Speaker 2: of Rome did not exercise canonical authority over the churches
Speaker 2: of the East in the first millennium. There you go,
Speaker 2: that means that Vatican one's claims are not true.
Speaker 1: Do you see that?
Speaker 2: Beyond that, there was the new ecumenist doctrine known as
Speaker 2: the Alexandria, a document on Synidality and premacy. This admission
Speaker 2: also means that Vatican One is false. Now, none of
Speaker 2: these people know about Vatican One. This is all Shimun
Speaker 2: has no knowledge of this. But I'm gonna say that
Speaker 2: you should go and read Vatican One in its entirety
Speaker 2: at papalincyclicals dot net, because you're gonna see a lot
Speaker 2: of things that most Roman Catholics don't tell you. So
Speaker 2: just like when these people talk about the Muslims and
Speaker 2: the evangelicals who convert Islam, and then they point out that, oh,
Speaker 2: you didn't know about the sahibl Hai, you didn't know
Speaker 2: about the Hadiths. You gotta believe you were just told
Speaker 2: that Islam is simple. You didn't know you had to
Speaker 2: believe all this other stuff. Well, guess what you didn't
Speaker 2: know that you had to believe when.
Speaker 1: Im sanked them, did you?
Speaker 2: You didn't know that you had to go into canon
Speaker 2: law in the Roman Catholic Church, which is binding on
Speaker 2: you as a lay person. We'll see what Romancolic canon
Speaker 2: law says about lay people and when they disagree with
Speaker 2: the papacy.
Speaker 1: Although in a.
Speaker 2: Sense of faith, this is the Vatican too, kenlaw, although
Speaker 2: in a sense of faith, a religious submission of intellect
Speaker 2: and will must be given to a doction which the
Speaker 2: Supreme Pontiff or the College of Bishops declares concerning faith
Speaker 2: or morals when they exercise the magisterium, even if they
Speaker 2: did not proclaim it a definitive act. So although it's
Speaker 2: not in a sent of faith, in the sense of dogma,
Speaker 2: in other words, they're saying that because the Pope might
Speaker 2: teach something that is wrong in non magisterial cases, this
Speaker 2: is called the ordinary teaching in Catholicism. Okay, do I
Speaker 2: have to submit to the ordinary teaching in Vatican? In
Speaker 2: the Roman Catholic canon law, a religious submission of intellect
Speaker 2: and will must be given to the doctrines that the
Speaker 2: Supreme Pontiff or the College of Bishops teach, even if
Speaker 2: they do not declare it a definitive act.
Speaker 1: So this.
Speaker 2: Destroys the lie that they all tell each other that
Speaker 2: they only have to believe the Ex Cathedra statements. And
Speaker 2: I have a whole talk on this showing that that's
Speaker 2: not true. There's five statements in Catholic theology and dogma
Speaker 2: that tell you that you can't just believe the Ex
Speaker 2: Cathedra statements. You don't get to handway Vatican two. And
Speaker 2: just like when you call out the Muslims, Oh it's
Speaker 2: not just Koran, baby, you also got to believe all
Speaker 2: of this other haadith stuff. Oh it's not just hopes
Speaker 2: ex Cathedral baby, you also got to believe all this
Speaker 2: papal nonsense.
Speaker 5: Baby.
Speaker 1: Let's give you another easy example.
Speaker 2: In thirteen oh two, it was dogmatic that you had
Speaker 2: to believe in the temporal supremacy of the Roman bishop
Speaker 2: to be saved.
Speaker 1: Do you know what this refers to?
Speaker 2: That the pope is not just a spiritual head of
Speaker 2: all the world, he's also a temporal world ruler and magistrate,
Speaker 2: a civil magistrate. And Boniface made this a dogmatic statement
Speaker 2: in thirteen oh two that you will be damned if
Speaker 2: you don't also accept the temporal authority. Now, post Vatican two,
Speaker 2: the Roman Catholic Church no longer teaches this. In fact,
Speaker 2: all of their documents about religious liberty, all the things
Speaker 2: that you find indent redenta whatever into gracio whatever the
Speaker 2: Vatican two uh do the tallest Humani Humane and the
Speaker 2: other document right.
Speaker 4: Mh.
Speaker 1: They teach.
Speaker 2: Freedom of conscience, the freedom of worship, all of the
Speaker 2: things that the post Vatican or the pre Vatican two
Speaker 2: popes had condemned. So mauri vos quanti cura lamenta, bilesan pachindi,
Speaker 2: dominici gragias. Those are some examples of the Syllabus of errors.
Speaker 2: All the things condemned in the Syllabus of errors. That's
Speaker 2: as late as Pious the ninth, the Pope the Vatican One.
Speaker 2: All of that is reversed at Vatican two. Prior to
Speaker 2: Vatican too, only a couple decades prior, because of the
Speaker 2: dangers of the interfaith acumenist movement. Pious the Eleventh in
Speaker 2: nineteen twenty eight wrote a famous and cyclical called Mortalium Animos.
Speaker 2: And in Mortalium Animos, I'll give you the link he
Speaker 2: outright condemns all interfaith gatherings as apostasy. There it is
Speaker 2: right there. These interfaith gatherings, according to him, are a
Speaker 2: surrendering of the faith. It is clear that the Apostolic
Speaker 2: See cannot take part on any terms in these assemblies.
Speaker 2: Nor is it lawful for Catholics to support the acumenus
Speaker 2: interfaith works, because it would give rise to a false Christianity.
Speaker 2: So you understand, it is an apostasy according to Mortalium
Speaker 2: animals to have interfaith gatherings, and the papacy cannot support
Speaker 2: it on any terms. Vatican two reverses this in an
Speaker 2: outright one percent contradiction and doesn't just make the interfaith
Speaker 2: gatherings amongst so called Christian groups, Protestants, Anglicans, whatever. Vatican
Speaker 2: two goes even further and makes it an inter religious gathering.
Speaker 2: And that's what happens at the two sec gatherings where
Speaker 2: John Paul the Second gets all the world religions together
Speaker 2: in a world prayer meeting, a world prayer meeting to
Speaker 2: what to all your respected respective deities. So nineteen twenty
Speaker 2: eight condemns all ecumenism right here, and within a few
Speaker 2: decades suddenly ecumenism is the work of the Holy Spirit.
Speaker 2: And this is what Shamun wants to go to. Well,
Speaker 2: what I say about a lot of the people who
Speaker 2: choose Roman Catholicism in these settings is that you get
Speaker 2: what you deserve, you get what you choose. So here
Speaker 2: is my talk from a while back, how Vatican one
Speaker 2: refutes Roman Catholicism in the papacy.
Speaker 1: Right there.
Speaker 2: Here is another talk about how Vatican won in the
Speaker 2: papacy are themselves contradictions. And I'm going to give you
Speaker 2: another one about showing that Vatican two.
Speaker 1: You have to believe it.
Speaker 2: Romancallolics lie and tell these tall tales that, oh, you
Speaker 2: don't have to actually believe that it cantoe, you can
Speaker 2: handwave it. It doesn't count. You see, now, anything that
Speaker 2: the papacy confirms, as you just saw, for the entire
Speaker 2: church from the apostolic chair, you've got to believe it.
Speaker 1: And really it.
Speaker 2: Doesn't matter whether it's ex cathedral, whether it's universal ordinary magisterium,
Speaker 2: because you still have to submit to the ordinary teaching
Speaker 2: even when it's not infallible, as Kenan seven to fifty
Speaker 2: two says. So this is why Shamoon and Albrecht and
Speaker 2: all of these goofballs are out to lunch, because they've
Speaker 2: chosen something for whatever reasons. I don't know what the
Speaker 2: reasons are, various weird, dumb reasons. Maybe because the papal
Speaker 2: Church loves skittles. Now, maybe it's a skittles thing. I
Speaker 2: don't know, But I'm going to give you the proof
Speaker 2: that you do have to submit to Vatican two. You
Speaker 2: see this talk here, if you go to the description
Speaker 2: of this talk. You will see the links to the
Speaker 2: five places. Actually there's six. Now I put six in there,
Speaker 2: six places in Catholic dogma that you have to accept
Speaker 2: Vatican two. So you see, there's no outs here. There's
Speaker 2: no way for these people, there's no place for them
Speaker 2: to run. They're not going to be able to say, oh,
Speaker 2: I don't have to accept Vatican two.
Speaker 1: Oh I don't have.
Speaker 2: To you know, interpret it in a rigorous way. None
Speaker 2: of that works. You don't even get to interpret Vatican two.
Speaker 2: Vatican two is what the papacy tells you.
Speaker 4: It is.
Speaker 1: Now, what's the source of all this? Again?
Speaker 2: In ten ninety, when the papacy schismed from the Orthodox Church,
Speaker 2: something radical happened in the Latin West. The pope decided
Speaker 2: that he was also, on the basis of the forgery
Speaker 2: known as the Donation of Constantine, a world ruler. And
Speaker 2: not only was a world ruler, he also made it
Speaker 2: dogmatic that in order to be saved, you must submit
Speaker 2: to and believe.
Speaker 1: In his worldly temporal authority. See that.
Speaker 2: The Roman Catholic Church no longer teaches this. In fact,
Speaker 2: the pope took off his triple cron he doesn't wear
Speaker 2: a three tiered papal tiara triple crown anymore because it
Speaker 2: signified his triple authority, including his earthly quisat hyderat king
Speaker 2: of the World status. I'm not kidding when I say that.
Speaker 2: And if you read what Diktatus Poppy initially says, the
Speaker 2: claims are preposterous. They're outlandish and ridiculous. And you don't
Speaker 2: see any of these claims in the first thousand years
Speaker 2: of Christianity, because it's an evolution, it's a development. But
Speaker 2: Shamoun and none of these people know this. And I
Speaker 2: guarantee you Albrecs has no answer to this because he
Speaker 2: probably isn't even aware what Unham Sunk Them says about
Speaker 2: the temporal supremacy of the Roman bishop. So in ten
Speaker 2: ninety Pope Gregory the Seventh mandates Dictatus Pope that the
Speaker 2: world that the Pope is a world ruler. By thirteen
Speaker 2: oh two, Boniface the Eighth dogmatizes it in Unum Sunk
Speaker 2: Them and even says that you have to believe.
Speaker 1: It to be saved.
Speaker 2: Okay, And post Vatican two, the Romancology Church teaches freedom
Speaker 2: of conscience, freedom of worships, the dignity the human being,
Speaker 2: and no one should be forced to believe this or
Speaker 2: that the exact night and day opposite of this position. Now,
Speaker 2: there are many more contradictions in Roman Catholic dog I'm
Speaker 2: just giving you some of the easy basics to disprove
Speaker 2: this stuff.
Speaker 1: You here in person. Oh so last, what we're doing
Speaker 1: is talking about the.
Speaker 2: Here we go car bloat overload. Let me read some
Speaker 2: super chats Scuma Bear ten dollars.
Speaker 1: I'm hype