1
00:00:00,080 --> 00:00:02,879
Speaker 1: Tis. The problem with science is that they use a

2
00:00:02,960 --> 00:00:06,799
quote mathematical theories such as multiverse or quote dark matter.

3
00:00:06,839 --> 00:00:10,519
By the way, that's all speculation of metaphysics, which supposedly

4
00:00:10,679 --> 00:00:15,720
modern science and scientism is against. They say it is

5
00:00:15,800 --> 00:00:20,359
true and that it exists in almost purely metaphysical way exactly.

6
00:00:21,079 --> 00:00:23,559
That's the main critique is that, you know, modern scientism

7
00:00:23,640 --> 00:00:26,199
is built on the anti metaphysical stance of the post

8
00:00:26,280 --> 00:00:30,839
Enlightenment worldview, and now they've come back to crazy sci

9
00:00:30,879 --> 00:00:37,479
fi metaphysical stuff with multiverses and you know, quantum foam theory,

10
00:00:37,560 --> 00:00:45,159
all this nonsense. Trombone coach ten dollars, Thank you so much,

11
00:00:45,280 --> 00:00:48,119
Don Walker, twenty New Zealand. No, we did that one.

12
00:00:48,240 --> 00:00:50,920
Call me Trinity becoming what's up man? Tedy's two dollars.

13
00:00:50,960 --> 00:00:54,439
This is a dynamic duo. Thanks ted True became a member.

14
00:00:54,439 --> 00:00:56,119
He says, I got to run back one of these

15
00:00:56,240 --> 00:00:59,280
Nick livestreams. Jay might have to borrow a disguise from

16
00:00:59,359 --> 00:01:06,719
Jimbob hell Hell now hile soul ten dollars, happy birthday.

17
00:01:07,599 --> 00:01:08,799
I hope you have a good one. When you're going

18
00:01:08,840 --> 00:01:11,640
to go back on Sam Heights PGL. I don't know,

19
00:01:11,680 --> 00:01:13,799
if they asked me to come back on, I'll be

20
00:01:14,719 --> 00:01:16,519
you get. The way to get me on shows or

21
00:01:16,599 --> 00:01:18,519
Nick on shows, you guys, is like people need to

22
00:01:18,519 --> 00:01:21,319
go in the chat and just remind them in the

23
00:01:21,400 --> 00:01:24,439
chat in the comments, like yeah, that's a better way,

24
00:01:24,439 --> 00:01:27,280
because if I just constantly spam and ask people to

25
00:01:27,280 --> 00:01:29,200
come on their shows, they get annoyed, and it is

26
00:01:30,040 --> 00:01:31,719
they want to know what the audience wants.

27
00:01:31,439 --> 00:01:34,040
Speaker 2: Not right, Yeah, if you keep on spamming in the

28
00:01:34,079 --> 00:01:36,120
chat enough, they'll be all right, maybe didn't they want

29
00:01:36,120 --> 00:01:36,680
to see the people.

30
00:01:36,719 --> 00:01:38,560
Speaker 1: Same with debates, right, So if you want Nick to

31
00:01:38,599 --> 00:01:42,280
debate some dude, like constantly ask that person's chat, you know,

32
00:01:42,359 --> 00:01:45,480
go into Jake's chat or Muslim Whoever's chat and be

33
00:01:45,519 --> 00:01:48,200
like you need the debate, Nick, blah blah blah. Yeah,

34
00:01:48,319 --> 00:01:51,159
locks toe up two dollars. Do you have any thoughts

35
00:01:51,200 --> 00:01:54,480
on the assisted un alive in government program? Well, that's

36
00:01:54,519 --> 00:01:58,000
part of you know, euthanasia and eugenics, So I mean

37
00:01:58,040 --> 00:02:00,560
that's part of the government strategy Jesus in a lot

38
00:02:00,599 --> 00:02:03,359
of these socialist countries like Canada. I've been talking about

39
00:02:03,400 --> 00:02:07,079
it for fifteen years, so yeah, I mean I have

40
00:02:07,200 --> 00:02:10,080
a lot to say about it, Ton twenty four, Smith

41
00:02:10,120 --> 00:02:12,479
ten dollars. I'm trying to understand the difference between nature

42
00:02:12,520 --> 00:02:16,560
being corrupted and quote guilty. Well, first of all, guilt

43
00:02:17,039 --> 00:02:19,560
in the Orthodox conception and even in the Roman Catholic conception.

44
00:02:19,719 --> 00:02:24,599
Now nowadays, it only makes sense in terms of personal

45
00:02:24,719 --> 00:02:29,120
decision and action and responsibility. There's no such thing as

46
00:02:29,360 --> 00:02:32,680
nature being guilty. That would be Manicheanism, that would be

47
00:02:33,360 --> 00:02:37,280
something that just doesn't make sense with anything but Calvinism.

48
00:02:37,800 --> 00:02:42,199
So nature is good, but guilt is accrued when an

49
00:02:42,240 --> 00:02:45,919
individual makes a sinful action against God's law or against

50
00:02:45,960 --> 00:02:48,039
that nature. And that's what you see James saying that

51
00:02:48,800 --> 00:02:53,560
sin is when passion is consented to. He doesn't say

52
00:02:53,680 --> 00:02:56,199
that the passions are sin. He says that as sin

53
00:02:56,400 --> 00:03:00,960
technically is when you consent to the passions against God's law.

54
00:03:01,319 --> 00:03:05,439
Even the passions themselves are not evil. But there's also

55
00:03:05,479 --> 00:03:07,400
saying as a guilty nature, And this is actually to

56
00:03:07,520 --> 00:03:12,039
confuse nature in person in anthropology. This is what Augustinian

57
00:03:12,080 --> 00:03:15,719
anthropology does, is that it collapses individual persons into their

58
00:03:15,800 --> 00:03:19,280
nature such that the entire nature is guilty in the

59
00:03:19,319 --> 00:03:21,800
mass dam nada, and that just doesn't make any sense

60
00:03:21,800 --> 00:03:24,080
if you read Saint Maxims, so particularly if you read

61
00:03:24,520 --> 00:03:27,240
Free Choice in Saint Maximus, where he can trast the

62
00:03:27,319 --> 00:03:32,840
Augustinian anthropology and modive willing versus the maximus Orthodox anthropology

63
00:03:32,840 --> 00:03:35,240
and motive willing. And that's why so many Orthodox Church

64
00:03:36,039 --> 00:03:39,639
Church fathers and saints will say, our nature itself isn't guilty.

65
00:03:39,719 --> 00:03:42,479
And when we use that language, it's to speak of

66
00:03:42,520 --> 00:03:48,759
the deprivation or the lack of the grace after the fall.

67
00:03:48,840 --> 00:03:52,080
If we are justified by being united to the divine nature,

68
00:03:52,199 --> 00:03:55,439
doesn't this mean that nature that isn't united to the

69
00:03:55,439 --> 00:03:58,560
divine nature is guilty. Again, it's deprived of grace, but

70
00:03:58,599 --> 00:04:03,719
it's not inherently guilty because it exists. That's why Orthodox

71
00:04:03,960 --> 00:04:07,680
theology of Mary makes this very point. Mary is not

72
00:04:07,759 --> 00:04:11,159
immaculately conceived. She doesn't need to be, because there's nothing

73
00:04:11,159 --> 00:04:14,800
inherently wrong with her nature. But being deprived of grace

74
00:04:15,120 --> 00:04:18,000
is what's lacking in our nature. So you see the

75
00:04:18,040 --> 00:04:21,519
difference there, that there's a jump between the deprivation of

76
00:04:21,560 --> 00:04:24,480
grace that we're all born into to saying well, if

77
00:04:24,480 --> 00:04:27,079
we're deprived of grace, then we're guilty and evil. No,

78
00:04:27,279 --> 00:04:30,959
it doesn't follow. Evil and guilt are not natural qualities

79
00:04:31,040 --> 00:04:34,480
or properties. They're negations, their privations. So the only way

80
00:04:34,480 --> 00:04:37,399
to be evil is to actually do an evil action.

81
00:04:37,959 --> 00:04:40,040
It's not a state of being. This thing as an

82
00:04:40,040 --> 00:04:45,000
evil state of being. That's Manichean. Why didn't Mary need

83
00:04:45,079 --> 00:04:48,399
to be quote saved even though she quote never sinned? Well,

84
00:04:48,439 --> 00:04:51,720
she never sinned due to grace, So she was full

85
00:04:51,759 --> 00:04:55,360
of grace, right she was, But she still died. And

86
00:04:55,360 --> 00:04:58,519
that's what disproves the immaculate conception. She wouldn't have needed

87
00:04:58,560 --> 00:05:01,879
to die or under death if she was not under

88
00:05:01,959 --> 00:05:06,439
original sin. So the arguments I think that you're arguing

89
00:05:06,439 --> 00:05:07,959
about Mary actually prove our position.

90
00:05:08,199 --> 00:05:11,000
Speaker 2: And I think it actually makes Mary like so much

91
00:05:11,040 --> 00:05:13,160
greater in the Orthodox Like more people think that she's

92
00:05:13,199 --> 00:05:16,480
greater in Catholic, but like she's greater in Orthodoxyalism because

93
00:05:16,519 --> 00:05:19,160
she still had the corrupted nature that is, you know,

94
00:05:20,319 --> 00:05:24,920
subsidized to death. And even with that nature, she chooses

95
00:05:25,519 --> 00:05:28,920
to you know, not sin, to actually follow God exactly.

96
00:05:29,240 --> 00:05:32,040
And but in catholicis much a little bit different. She

97
00:05:32,079 --> 00:05:33,199
doesn't have that nature.

98
00:05:33,399 --> 00:05:35,399
Speaker 1: She has a cheat code. There's a cheat code with

99
00:05:35,480 --> 00:05:37,519
Mary in exactly the exact conception.

100
00:05:37,920 --> 00:05:40,319
Speaker 2: So it's more about, like, you know, not what she

101
00:05:40,439 --> 00:05:42,120
did at all, more about God is just kind of

102
00:05:42,199 --> 00:05:45,920
rolling the dice and granting someone this nature already exactly.

103
00:05:45,959 --> 00:05:50,560
Speaker 1: Black King's Black Bishops, Black Players. Contimperary companion says, happy birthday, Jay,

104
00:05:50,560 --> 00:05:53,040
and what's up Nick? Thank you. That's a great clips channel.

105
00:05:53,120 --> 00:05:55,120
Be s trying to follow a contimpreak companion. By the way,

106
00:05:55,120 --> 00:05:57,480
the clip channel's been popping off. Shout out to Jake

107
00:05:57,560 --> 00:06:03,000
Ridlesnake between Instagram and YouTube. He did some clips of

108
00:06:03,040 --> 00:06:05,879
me that got like five hundred thousand to a million

109
00:06:05,959 --> 00:06:12,519
views total. Shout out to orb On on Twitter over

110
00:06:12,560 --> 00:06:17,000
here or what's orb orbo Bro did some clips, one

111
00:06:17,040 --> 00:06:19,160
that got one hundred thousand, another got one hundred thousand,

112
00:06:19,160 --> 00:06:22,199
So appreciate those. The clips are popping off, y'all. Keep

113
00:06:22,199 --> 00:06:24,800
doing it, keep turning it out. Feel free to clip

114
00:06:24,800 --> 00:06:27,279
myself anywhere, do whatever you want. I don't care monetize it,

115
00:06:27,319 --> 00:06:28,639
go for it, just link back to me as the

116
00:06:28,800 --> 00:06:34,600
only thing I request. Let's see, all right, I think

117
00:06:34,639 --> 00:06:37,040
I've got all the super jets. Let's see who's next.

118
00:06:37,120 --> 00:06:38,360
Is intanted? What's up man?

119
00:06:40,040 --> 00:06:40,319
Speaker 3: Hello?

120
00:06:40,439 --> 00:06:43,959
Speaker 4: J Hey, Happy birthday.

121
00:06:44,519 --> 00:06:50,079
Speaker 5: Hello, Nick, I just had one idea, one short idea

122
00:06:50,079 --> 00:06:52,720
I'd like to share, and two questions.

123
00:06:52,959 --> 00:06:55,319
Speaker 4: Okay, more on the reading list.

124
00:06:55,879 --> 00:07:01,319
Speaker 5: So the idea creditally I have is it's related to

125
00:07:01,399 --> 00:07:07,560
how dualism and modernism just destroyed metaphysics and even our

126
00:07:07,600 --> 00:07:09,000
basic understanding of the world.

127
00:07:10,279 --> 00:07:13,120
Speaker 4: It's basically about the free will and free choice.

128
00:07:14,240 --> 00:07:18,160
Speaker 5: Orthodoxy teaches that the free choice is given to choose

129
00:07:18,160 --> 00:07:23,759
between goods good things, that it is even possible to

130
00:07:23,879 --> 00:07:25,519
have multiplicity of good things.

131
00:07:26,160 --> 00:07:30,000
Speaker 1: And the way if be a tific vision was true,

132
00:07:30,000 --> 00:07:31,120
it is not possible but good.

133
00:07:32,480 --> 00:07:37,639
Speaker 5: Yeah, And currently, even in the fallen state, we still

134
00:07:39,319 --> 00:07:43,680
experience and choose between good and evil things as if

135
00:07:44,000 --> 00:07:46,279
they both are good, and.

136
00:07:47,839 --> 00:07:52,279
Speaker 4: I feel like we still see them as.

137
00:07:52,439 --> 00:07:59,160
Speaker 5: Equivalent or possible paths, let's say when they're not, because

138
00:07:59,160 --> 00:08:01,600
that is basically a part about our nature to choose

139
00:08:01,600 --> 00:08:06,759
between good things, and that's how we perceive them.

140
00:08:06,959 --> 00:08:10,600
Speaker 1: Yeah. I think when we are in the fallen mode

141
00:08:10,639 --> 00:08:15,920
of willing and we choose evil, we're choosing. We might

142
00:08:16,000 --> 00:08:19,199
deceive ourselves into thinking that we're choosing a good but

143
00:08:19,480 --> 00:08:23,079
we're still choosing something that is ultimately a negation or

144
00:08:23,120 --> 00:08:25,040
a privation if that makes sense.

145
00:08:25,439 --> 00:08:30,519
Speaker 5: Yeah, yeah, we if we talk about light and shadow,

146
00:08:31,360 --> 00:08:37,320
we even just in the basic words, were still presumed

147
00:08:37,360 --> 00:08:39,960
that shadow has its solemntology.

148
00:08:39,279 --> 00:08:42,320
Speaker 1: When it doesn't, right, Yeah, exactly. I mean I like

149
00:08:42,399 --> 00:08:44,039
the analogy of I mean, they didn't really have this

150
00:08:44,080 --> 00:08:46,679
in the Patristic era, but like negative numbers are a good,

151
00:08:46,799 --> 00:08:49,399
you know, idea for how kind of I mean, it's

152
00:08:49,399 --> 00:08:51,440
a thing, but it's not really a thing, right, So

153
00:08:51,720 --> 00:08:56,399
it kind of has a you know, a linguistic and

154
00:08:56,679 --> 00:09:01,039
linguistic existence, but you know, negative two hundred and fifty

155
00:09:01,039 --> 00:09:05,159
three doesn't actually have ontological existence, right, other than some

156
00:09:05,159 --> 00:09:08,799
sort of conceptual analogical reality that we're saying, it's kind

157
00:09:08,799 --> 00:09:10,679
of evils, kind of like this where you kind of

158
00:09:10,840 --> 00:09:14,840
keep digging yourself, you know, deeper and deeper into negative reality,

159
00:09:14,919 --> 00:09:15,440
so to speak.

160
00:09:17,600 --> 00:09:20,639
Speaker 4: Yeah, So that was kind of my idea I wanted

161
00:09:20,639 --> 00:09:21,000
to share.

162
00:09:21,200 --> 00:09:25,039
Speaker 5: And so the first question I had is I've been

163
00:09:25,240 --> 00:09:27,559
watching your debate.

164
00:09:27,360 --> 00:09:31,440
Speaker 4: With Tim Gordon, and on.

165
00:09:31,360 --> 00:09:36,480
Speaker 5: The section of Philly Oquay, the topic of the Trinity

166
00:09:36,559 --> 00:09:40,919
came up, and Tim said that we know members of

167
00:09:40,960 --> 00:09:45,360
the trinity based on our relations of opposition, and I

168
00:09:45,440 --> 00:09:49,759
understand the intuitive argument for why strong, especially since we

169
00:09:49,840 --> 00:09:55,240
have the Orthodox model, but I don't have the specific

170
00:09:56,120 --> 00:09:58,320
concepts and you know.

171
00:09:58,480 --> 00:09:59,519
Speaker 4: Formulations for that.

172
00:10:00,080 --> 00:10:04,039
Speaker 1: Yeah, so first and foremost, Yeah, absolutely gladly in fact,

173
00:10:04,080 --> 00:10:06,919
because this is a persisting problem. So the first and

174
00:10:07,039 --> 00:10:12,639
best Orthodox essay on this issue of the problem of

175
00:10:12,720 --> 00:10:16,879
relations of opposition in terms of the Trinity is Loski's

176
00:10:17,039 --> 00:10:21,440
essay Procession of the Holy Spirit in Orthodox Doctrine. Let

177
00:10:21,440 --> 00:10:25,159
me get that pdf for you. That one is absolutely

178
00:10:25,159 --> 00:10:28,600
necessary and when if you read that and understand that,

179
00:10:28,639 --> 00:10:32,600
you really probably won't need any of the other critiques

180
00:10:32,600 --> 00:10:35,799
because Losky is so precise and so clear and so

181
00:10:36,759 --> 00:10:40,120
just devastating in this. I mean it's only like twenty

182
00:10:40,200 --> 00:10:42,720
I think it's only fifteen twenty pages. I'll put it

183
00:10:42,720 --> 00:10:44,600
in the chat right here, and if you pull it up,

184
00:10:44,759 --> 00:10:46,919
you'll get on Google. You'll get the PDF right away.

185
00:10:47,879 --> 00:10:49,759
I think it is a chapter in the book Image

186
00:10:49,799 --> 00:10:52,120
and Likeness. Yes it is, so it's chapter four. If

187
00:10:52,159 --> 00:10:53,360
you have the book Image and Likeness, you do know

188
00:10:53,440 --> 00:10:57,399
what to get the PDF. But there's the pdf. There's

189
00:10:57,519 --> 00:11:00,759
multiple levels of critique here. And this is relevant too,

190
00:11:00,840 --> 00:11:03,320
because if you remember when I had that so called

191
00:11:03,360 --> 00:11:07,279
interaction debate quote unquote with Wagner. Wagner had no idea

192
00:11:07,320 --> 00:11:09,399
what I was talking about, and he just assumed that

193
00:11:09,519 --> 00:11:12,200
everything that I was saying was somehow my ignorance of

194
00:11:12,240 --> 00:11:15,559
Tomism had nothing to do with that. I was pointing

195
00:11:15,600 --> 00:11:20,759
out that in the Cappa Docians, relations of origin or

196
00:11:20,799 --> 00:11:23,360
relations of the persons is not the same thing as

197
00:11:23,399 --> 00:11:27,480
a relation of opposition. Relation of opposition as a theory

198
00:11:27,919 --> 00:11:31,279
that Augustine begins to kind of toy with that really

199
00:11:31,320 --> 00:11:35,039
gets solidified in the Medieval Church, Latin Church, and in Aquinas.

200
00:11:35,600 --> 00:11:38,159
Now Loski deals with all this in this essay and

201
00:11:38,200 --> 00:11:40,559
he explicates it very well. And some of the main

202
00:11:40,559 --> 00:11:43,960
critiques would be, first of all, in a this is

203
00:11:44,000 --> 00:11:48,200
a critique that Pharrell makes in God History and Dialectic.

204
00:11:48,360 --> 00:11:50,080
So I think it's in book. It's either book one

205
00:11:50,159 --> 00:11:52,039
or two. This is another book you should get if

206
00:11:52,080 --> 00:11:55,080
you can. God History, Dialectic, Volume one or two. That

207
00:11:55,159 --> 00:11:58,440
doesn't make sense in a triad to talk about opposition,

208
00:11:58,440 --> 00:12:02,360
because opposition in the medieval world relates to a diad, right,

209
00:12:02,360 --> 00:12:04,759
because remember they counted by division, and we've covered this

210
00:12:04,799 --> 00:12:07,639
in the debates of the Muslims about counting by division.

211
00:12:07,679 --> 00:12:10,840
Versus counting by identity. In the ancient world, for example,

212
00:12:10,840 --> 00:12:14,000
in the Nicene Creed, we count by division because we

213
00:12:14,039 --> 00:12:17,480
say that God is one and undivided. There's also counting

214
00:12:17,519 --> 00:12:20,480
by identity in the ancient medieval world too, but specifically

215
00:12:20,480 --> 00:12:23,639
for the triad. When the church fathers and the early

216
00:12:23,679 --> 00:12:28,080
writers talked about and the medieval writers thought of counting,

217
00:12:28,200 --> 00:12:30,519
they counted by division, which means that you have a whole,

218
00:12:31,080 --> 00:12:36,039
and then to count to two, you divide that by

219
00:12:36,240 --> 00:12:39,559
itself and you get two, right, and then you divide

220
00:12:39,600 --> 00:12:42,519
from that and you get three. So they're counting by

221
00:12:42,720 --> 00:12:45,480
dividing a hole or a monad. And this is kind

222
00:12:45,480 --> 00:12:49,279
of platonic counting as well. And that's why the Creed

223
00:12:49,399 --> 00:12:53,320
says one and undivided. Why would they use that term. Well,

224
00:12:53,320 --> 00:12:56,840
they're counting by a division. And doctor Branson has shown

225
00:12:56,879 --> 00:12:59,159
this by the way, and a lot of his essays

226
00:12:59,200 --> 00:13:02,720
and debates. They got into this with Jake years ago

227
00:13:02,879 --> 00:13:06,000
with doctor Branson versus Jake and their debate. I got

228
00:13:06,000 --> 00:13:09,200
into this in my debate with I think Jake or Kikachu,

229
00:13:09,279 --> 00:13:11,399
one of the two I forget. But this has come

230
00:13:11,480 --> 00:13:14,159
up multiple times to refute the lpt right. So the

231
00:13:14,200 --> 00:13:16,559
logical problem the trinity. You got to understand this kind

232
00:13:16,559 --> 00:13:19,879
of stuff anyway. That's separate from this, but it relates

233
00:13:19,960 --> 00:13:24,639
because in a triad you can't have opposition. There is

234
00:13:24,679 --> 00:13:28,960
no opposition. If you read the Cappadocians, for example, and

235
00:13:29,039 --> 00:13:31,720
Big or Maximus and Big one number one. He goes

236
00:13:31,720 --> 00:13:34,440
to the Cappadocians to say that the trinity cannot be

237
00:13:34,480 --> 00:13:37,120
a diead. There's no opposition in God, so it has

238
00:13:37,200 --> 00:13:40,960
to be a triad because the triad transcends the diad.

239
00:13:41,519 --> 00:13:45,200
This is a numerical argument that Cappadocians make. This is

240
00:13:45,240 --> 00:13:48,120
what I was trying to explain to Wagner. He didn't

241
00:13:48,120 --> 00:13:49,960
care about any of this, had no concern with it.

242
00:13:50,000 --> 00:13:52,039
All he wanted to do was clip a supposed own.

243
00:13:52,399 --> 00:13:57,039
But here's the problem. If you read Congar has an

244
00:13:57,120 --> 00:14:01,080
essay making all the same points that I made to Wagner,

245
00:14:01,679 --> 00:14:05,559
so Eves cone Gar on the Trinity and relations of

246
00:14:05,600 --> 00:14:09,240
opposition in Augustine, and I'm gonna give you that essay

247
00:14:09,279 --> 00:14:12,799
right here. You'll notice that, oh, okay, so Jay actually

248
00:14:12,840 --> 00:14:15,159
didn't know what he was talking about. Between the Roman

249
00:14:15,200 --> 00:14:20,399
cality theologian and the Orthodox the Elosian critiquing relations of opposition.

250
00:14:21,039 --> 00:14:24,080
It's all in these two essays. And actually Wagner was

251
00:14:24,080 --> 00:14:25,639
the one that had no idea what he was talking about.

252
00:14:25,679 --> 00:14:28,360
But but and I since have asked Wagner if you

253
00:14:28,399 --> 00:14:31,080
would like to read these things and we can revisit

254
00:14:31,120 --> 00:14:35,399
this conversation. He has to date no interest whatsoever in

255
00:14:35,440 --> 00:14:37,559
looking at any of the materials or discussing it. Now,

256
00:14:37,639 --> 00:14:42,159
last point, beyond the fact that I mean Conear in

257
00:14:42,200 --> 00:14:45,279
this essay basically says everything that I argue that relations

258
00:14:45,279 --> 00:14:48,279
of opposition is not the way that the Cappadocians lay

259
00:14:48,320 --> 00:14:53,039
out their triad. That's a later medieval specific development in

260
00:14:53,080 --> 00:14:56,159
the Latin Church. Loski says, there's a really there's a

261
00:14:56,159 --> 00:14:59,919
couple easy points here. At number one, the Cappadocians teach

262
00:15:00,080 --> 00:15:04,159
relations of origin, not relations of opposition. And if they

263
00:15:04,240 --> 00:15:07,679
use the terminology of opposition, it's not relations of opposition.

264
00:15:07,799 --> 00:15:12,039
You can't define persons by what they're opposed to because

265
00:15:12,080 --> 00:15:14,559
it begs the question, So the Father is the father

266
00:15:14,600 --> 00:15:16,799
because he's not the Son and not the Spirit. The

267
00:15:16,840 --> 00:15:18,720
Spirit is the Spirit because he's not the Father not

268
00:15:18,720 --> 00:15:20,639
the Son. That doesn't tell you who they are. That

269
00:15:20,679 --> 00:15:23,799
tells you whether they're not, so they're negative statements. And

270
00:15:23,879 --> 00:15:28,320
Loski critiques this and says a relation is a predicate,

271
00:15:28,840 --> 00:15:32,080
not a subject. So it's confusing subjects and predicates to

272
00:15:32,120 --> 00:15:34,759
say that the father is the relation that he has

273
00:15:34,799 --> 00:15:37,679
with the son. I am not the relation I have

274
00:15:37,799 --> 00:15:41,000
to my dad. That's a property or an attribute about me.

275
00:15:41,679 --> 00:15:44,399
That's not who I am as a subject. It's just

276
00:15:44,519 --> 00:15:47,120
one of the many predicates that you could say about me.

277
00:15:47,600 --> 00:15:51,360
So it's confusing subject and predicate. It's so stupid. But

278
00:15:51,440 --> 00:15:55,639
Aquinas says person is relation, persona at rolatio. So it

279
00:15:55,759 --> 00:15:58,000
makes sense why Tim would argue that way because in

280
00:15:58,080 --> 00:16:03,399
Tomistic theology are because of divine simplicity the relations that

281
00:16:03,399 --> 00:16:06,799
they have to the other persons. But that's preposterous. A

282
00:16:06,840 --> 00:16:10,360
person is a subject, not a relation. So the father

283
00:16:10,559 --> 00:16:12,480
is not the relation that he has to the son.

284
00:16:12,600 --> 00:16:14,840
The father is a divine subject of the father, the

285
00:16:14,919 --> 00:16:16,840
cause of the archae of the fount, et cetera. All

286
00:16:16,879 --> 00:16:19,720
of those terms that are hyposthetic properties go into define

287
00:16:19,720 --> 00:16:23,679
the person's not relations of opposition. And that's why when

288
00:16:23,720 --> 00:16:27,360
I said it's hyposthetic properties that define the person, something

289
00:16:27,480 --> 00:16:31,440
very basic to Orthodox and Eastern and Triad and in

290
00:16:31,480 --> 00:16:34,960
cappodotion and Christology, Tim Gordon had no idea what that

291
00:16:35,000 --> 00:16:37,960
even is? What do you mean hypostetic properties? What is that?

292
00:16:38,039 --> 00:16:40,039
Relations of origin? What is that? Well, just read the

293
00:16:40,080 --> 00:16:44,120
Lost essay and it's all right there. I apologize with

294
00:16:44,159 --> 00:16:45,000
that long ramp.

295
00:16:45,759 --> 00:16:51,080
Speaker 5: Yeah, I just wanted to quickly clarify so my understanding

296
00:16:51,240 --> 00:16:55,000
that they basically have the only way out of absolute

297
00:16:55,039 --> 00:16:59,399
divine simplicity in relations of oppositions, and it's.

298
00:16:59,159 --> 00:17:01,159
Speaker 4: Just basically picking the can down the.

299
00:17:01,159 --> 00:17:04,720
Speaker 5: Road, yep, when you could keique the ADS position correct And.

300
00:17:07,279 --> 00:17:09,000
Speaker 1: Yeah, well, if you read on the Trinity, if you

301
00:17:09,039 --> 00:17:12,880
read on the Trinity, Augustine struggles with and he says,

302
00:17:13,640 --> 00:17:17,440
you know, if God is this absolutely simple neoplatonic definition

303
00:17:17,519 --> 00:17:20,480
of simplicity, and he explicitly uses the Plutonian definition what

304
00:17:20,519 --> 00:17:23,119
simplicity is, which is not what the capinitions do. He says,

305
00:17:23,160 --> 00:17:26,160
how can we distinguish how is there a real, you know,

306
00:17:26,160 --> 00:17:29,359
distinction between father and son? He says, well, maybe we

307
00:17:29,440 --> 00:17:32,240
could say that they're not the other, you know, the father,

308
00:17:32,359 --> 00:17:36,240
isn't this one and isn't this one? Well, but that's true,

309
00:17:36,279 --> 00:17:38,480
But that doesn't really tell you anything about like who

310
00:17:38,519 --> 00:17:42,400
they are. And it's that's also not a relation of

311
00:17:42,440 --> 00:17:46,799
opposition because there's two things that it would be opposed to.

312
00:17:47,240 --> 00:17:50,279
Relation of opposition is too So how can it be

313
00:17:50,319 --> 00:17:53,799
a relation of opposition when there's actually the father and

314
00:17:53,839 --> 00:17:57,200
the son and the spirit. So that would be pryad

315
00:17:57,279 --> 00:18:00,000
of opposition, which is just nonsense. It makes no sense.

316
00:18:02,960 --> 00:18:09,319
Speaker 5: Yeah, and basically what I wanted to say, oh is

317
00:18:09,319 --> 00:18:09,799
that it.

318
00:18:11,519 --> 00:18:13,240
Speaker 4: No, I just forgot one second.

319
00:18:13,680 --> 00:18:17,160
Speaker 1: Okay, I'll read a super jare while you're thinking, so

320
00:18:17,279 --> 00:18:19,119
we got nick.

321
00:18:19,119 --> 00:18:22,839
Speaker 6: If you want to say a thing, feel free, I mean, yeah,

322
00:18:23,160 --> 00:18:24,920
to your point about when you're talking about counting by

323
00:18:24,960 --> 00:18:26,599
division and stuff like that, and how they used to

324
00:18:26,599 --> 00:18:29,200
count by division, I mean, there's a paper you're probably

325
00:18:29,200 --> 00:18:30,160
read by David Liisman.

326
00:18:30,240 --> 00:18:32,000
Speaker 2: He says we don't count by division. He gives some

327
00:18:32,079 --> 00:18:34,039
good examples and that as to why we don't count

328
00:18:34,079 --> 00:18:36,799
by division. Like, for example, if you have you know,

329
00:18:36,839 --> 00:18:37,839
like a baseball.

330
00:18:37,480 --> 00:18:41,200
Speaker 7: Analogy, if you have you say eight there was eight.

331
00:18:41,079 --> 00:18:43,799
Speaker 2: Batters struck out, right, does that mean that eight people

332
00:18:43,839 --> 00:18:46,519
struck out well? Not necessarily, because there could have been

333
00:18:46,720 --> 00:18:50,279
you know, two persons that batted twice, right, And so

334
00:18:50,319 --> 00:18:52,359
we're not going to count two different things that can

335
00:18:52,400 --> 00:18:55,680
be predicated differently necessarily by identity, because that can lead

336
00:18:55,720 --> 00:18:58,240
into issues. And then obviously Bop Branston gives his whole

337
00:18:58,279 --> 00:19:00,480
analogy with like the gallon of water and stuff like that.

338
00:19:00,519 --> 00:19:02,160
If you drop a molecule, is it's still a down

339
00:19:02,240 --> 00:19:04,480
of water. So we see in everyday life we're not

340
00:19:04,519 --> 00:19:08,240
counting by identity, you know, in every day scenarios, right,

341
00:19:08,440 --> 00:19:10,200
So we still do at times, but it doesn't mean

342
00:19:10,240 --> 00:19:10,440
that we.

343
00:19:10,400 --> 00:19:14,119
Speaker 1: All exactly exactly. And so counting by identity works for

344
00:19:14,200 --> 00:19:17,240
certain specific things that you can't kind of put into

345
00:19:17,319 --> 00:19:21,640
parts or divide, for example, a logical law or a

346
00:19:21,799 --> 00:19:24,920
set right. It doesn't make any sense to say you

347
00:19:24,960 --> 00:19:27,559
know half of the law of logic. So things that

348
00:19:27,599 --> 00:19:30,960
are abstract or conceptual you kind of have to count

349
00:19:30,960 --> 00:19:34,680
by identity. And this is in medieval philosophy, as arct

350
00:19:34,720 --> 00:19:37,599
Brandson pointed out, this is first and second imposition. But

351
00:19:37,720 --> 00:19:41,920
things that are objects or mundane objects, everyday world objects,

352
00:19:41,960 --> 00:19:44,319
even the ancient medieval world, they would count by division,

353
00:19:44,720 --> 00:19:47,799
but in abstract objects they would count with identity. So

354
00:19:48,039 --> 00:19:50,200
and I think in the trinity you could argue that, well,

355
00:19:50,240 --> 00:19:53,759
we're kind of doing both because we're counting the essence

356
00:19:54,200 --> 00:19:57,000
by division, but we're counting the persons by identity. So

357
00:19:59,200 --> 00:20:01,640
this is something of that. The Muslims just this is

358
00:20:01,720 --> 00:20:05,160
way too high high tier. Yeah, they have no idea

359
00:20:05,160 --> 00:20:08,599
what you're talking about. But JB says, for ten dollars,

360
00:20:11,079 --> 00:20:14,039
a ton of heterodox positions are premised on the idea

361
00:20:14,079 --> 00:20:17,440
that none of those Orthodox saints or church fathers are

362
00:20:17,480 --> 00:20:20,200
better than me. God just picked them and it makes

363
00:20:20,200 --> 00:20:23,160
it easy. I think you could argue that, Yeah, I mean,

364
00:20:23,160 --> 00:20:25,400
it's like a lot of the Protestant attitude is just like,

365
00:20:25,680 --> 00:20:29,000
you know, it's so based on hubris. They don't even

366
00:20:29,000 --> 00:20:29,480
realize it.

367
00:20:29,480 --> 00:20:29,640
Speaker 8: You know.

368
00:20:29,680 --> 00:20:32,480
Speaker 1: It's like, no, actually, I don't need two thousand years

369
00:20:32,480 --> 00:20:35,480
of church fathers and saints and scholars. I can figure

370
00:20:35,480 --> 00:20:37,319
out what the canon is, and I'll read some books

371
00:20:37,319 --> 00:20:39,400
and that'll tell me what the Bible of canon is.

372
00:20:40,480 --> 00:20:44,359
Let's talk God. Five dollars. Why would Oriental Orthodox have

373
00:20:44,400 --> 00:20:53,160
a dogmatic problem with infant baptism if they hold or iconoclasm.

374
00:20:53,240 --> 00:20:56,039
I don't think they have a problem with infant baptism.

375
00:20:56,079 --> 00:20:57,599
So I'm not sure what you mean. Now you say

376
00:20:58,039 --> 00:21:00,519
they have a problem with iconoclasm. I mean, I think

377
00:21:00,880 --> 00:21:03,640
Snack pointed out several years ago that there is a

378
00:21:03,759 --> 00:21:06,920
kind of a tendency amongst Orientals to become more and

379
00:21:07,000 --> 00:21:11,240
more iconic classic and and to lose their iconographic traditions.

380
00:21:12,519 --> 00:21:14,880
But I'm not sure what you mean by them not

381
00:21:14,880 --> 00:21:20,000
believing infant baptism. I thought they did. Birds aren't real.

382
00:21:20,000 --> 00:21:22,920
Ten dollars, Thank you, Jay, We appreciate you. I appreciate that.

383
00:21:22,920 --> 00:21:24,880
I think I'm getting a cold for my birthday, so,

384
00:21:25,440 --> 00:21:32,640
oh trombone, five dollars, Happy birthday. Does astrology play any

385
00:21:32,720 --> 00:21:34,200
role in your spiritual practices?

386
00:21:34,359 --> 00:21:34,440
Speaker 4: No?

387
00:21:35,559 --> 00:21:40,160
Speaker 1: Can the energies of the celestial luminaries be called God's energies? No,

388
00:21:40,319 --> 00:21:43,720
because anything that would be a created energy is not

389
00:21:43,759 --> 00:21:46,000
a divine energy. All God's energies are uncreated.

390
00:21:46,440 --> 00:21:47,799
Speaker 7: Sound very originistic.

391
00:21:48,000 --> 00:21:50,680
Speaker 1: Yeah, that does sound like origin And I mean if

392
00:21:50,680 --> 00:21:52,920
you go back to the Church fathers, I mean they

393
00:21:53,240 --> 00:21:57,160
thought the celestial spheres had influence on Earth, but they

394
00:21:57,160 --> 00:21:59,759
would be you know, like the moon and the tides,

395
00:21:59,799 --> 00:22:01,799
that kind of a thing. It's not like, you know,

396
00:22:01,839 --> 00:22:04,880
the moon is like a deity that's you know, controlling us.

397
00:22:04,880 --> 00:22:07,759
And causing women to have periods or something huge Jackman

398
00:22:07,920 --> 00:22:13,400
five dollars. How would you respond to the objection that

399
00:22:13,759 --> 00:22:20,680
divine conceptualism conflicts with define divine a sayity. I don't

400
00:22:20,720 --> 00:22:23,880
see why that would be a problem. If God is

401
00:22:23,960 --> 00:22:27,240
assay or exists of himself, that really wouldn't have anything

402
00:22:27,240 --> 00:22:29,319
to do with whether he's a divine mind who can

403
00:22:29,359 --> 00:22:32,160
conceive of things. So I'm not I don't understand that objection.

404
00:22:32,240 --> 00:22:35,599
You have to flesh it out more. Crypto Crusader five dollars.

405
00:22:35,640 --> 00:22:41,799
Did Aquinas know? Did Aquinas not know that I think

406
00:22:41,799 --> 00:22:44,720
you're talking about relationship apout position or did he just

407
00:22:44,839 --> 00:22:47,240
think he didn't need to address it. Well, one thing

408
00:22:47,240 --> 00:22:49,039
that you have to understand about Aquinas and a lot

409
00:22:49,079 --> 00:22:51,920
of the Medievals and people today don't really get this.

410
00:22:52,400 --> 00:22:53,720
And I'll let Nick talk. I don't mean to be

411
00:22:53,799 --> 00:22:58,279
hogging the microphone. But in the medieval era, in the

412
00:22:58,319 --> 00:23:02,640
medieval world, it was actually considered an argument to cite

413
00:23:02,640 --> 00:23:06,079
an authority. I mean, I think they had a conception

414
00:23:06,200 --> 00:23:08,440
of the fact that authorities could be wrong. But if

415
00:23:08,480 --> 00:23:12,200
you're citing Aristotle or Augustine to the medial world, that's

416
00:23:12,240 --> 00:23:15,440
a really strong argument, and so authorities had a lot

417
00:23:15,559 --> 00:23:19,960
more power in argumentation than they do nowadays post Enlightenment.

418
00:23:21,039 --> 00:23:23,759
So I think you know, if you read say semic

419
00:23:23,759 --> 00:23:27,680
countriest in Telas, like volumes one or two or three,

420
00:23:27,759 --> 00:23:30,799
where Aquinas makes a lot of argumentation about apologetics or

421
00:23:30,839 --> 00:23:36,079
about the trinity and how he thinks that he For example,

422
00:23:36,079 --> 00:23:39,559
he argues, I'm pretty sure in Semicuntrides in Telates the

423
00:23:39,559 --> 00:23:42,759
Holy Spirit proceeds from the essence, which is a really bad,

424
00:23:42,960 --> 00:23:46,319
stupid position, right, but he's forced into that position because

425
00:23:46,319 --> 00:23:50,039
of his presupposition about divine simplicity. And when he in

426
00:23:50,480 --> 00:23:53,440
de Veritate is arguing against John Damascus on the energy

427
00:23:53,440 --> 00:23:58,119
as a, Quinas says, well, mima IDs says that simplicity

428
00:23:58,359 --> 00:24:01,920
can't have any real distinctions or any strong hard distinctions,

429
00:24:01,960 --> 00:24:05,119
because that would mean that there's parts. So he just

430
00:24:05,200 --> 00:24:11,200
assumes that distinction entails composition and division, and his source

431
00:24:11,519 --> 00:24:15,480
is literally Aristotle in Mimon eighties. So, I mean, I

432
00:24:15,519 --> 00:24:19,440
know people want to exalt Aquinas like he's quasi infallible,

433
00:24:19,480 --> 00:24:22,119
but like that's just not a very good argument. And

434
00:24:22,160 --> 00:24:24,160
as you get older and more mature, I think you'll

435
00:24:24,240 --> 00:24:27,480
understand that Aquinas makes a lot of mistakes, and to

436
00:24:27,519 --> 00:24:30,680
sort of put these individual people on pedestals as Rome

437
00:24:30,759 --> 00:24:33,039
does is just just doesn't make sense.

438
00:24:33,079 --> 00:24:35,960
Speaker 2: So I literally, I literally hear so many like Catholics

439
00:24:36,000 --> 00:24:38,640
on TikTok and like being so serious. They'll say that

440
00:24:38,759 --> 00:24:41,759
like he's greater than all the church fathers and that

441
00:24:41,799 --> 00:24:45,279
he is like he might even be greater than the apostles.

442
00:24:45,200 --> 00:24:47,960
Speaker 1: Like crazy, yeah, And that's that's really a papal mind

443
00:24:47,960 --> 00:24:50,240
It's a papal Protestant mindset, right. I mean, it's not

444
00:24:50,759 --> 00:24:53,400
accidental to the Church that exalted one bishop to be

445
00:24:53,640 --> 00:24:56,799
the dude. They're also going to pick and choose the dudes.

446
00:24:57,359 --> 00:25:00,400
And the irony here, of course, is that the modern

447
00:25:00,599 --> 00:25:03,880
Vatican for the last hundred years they don't care about Aquitas.

448
00:25:03,880 --> 00:25:07,680
They moved past homism. Darkamer twenty dollars Happy birthday, Jay,

449
00:25:08,000 --> 00:25:08,720
what's up Nick?

450
00:25:09,359 --> 00:25:09,519
Speaker 4: You?

451
00:25:09,599 --> 00:25:13,240
Speaker 1: And made by Jim Bob were successful in getting me

452
00:25:13,279 --> 00:25:15,039
back into church. Well that's good man right here, that

453
00:25:15,119 --> 00:25:19,440
dark banana up to about five dollars. How come there's

454
00:25:19,480 --> 00:25:22,160
no people calling in. He's great man. He's like the

455
00:25:22,160 --> 00:25:24,160
biggest super chatter of the last month. He's like one

456
00:25:24,200 --> 00:25:26,839
hundreds of dollars of super chests. So we love banana

457
00:25:26,880 --> 00:25:27,359
of the butt.

458
00:25:28,079 --> 00:25:29,000
Speaker 7: Yeah.

459
00:25:29,039 --> 00:25:31,519
Speaker 1: And by the way, is that a reference to TJ. Kirk.

460
00:25:31,559 --> 00:25:33,880
I'm assuming that's what that means, banana of the butt,

461
00:25:33,880 --> 00:25:38,079
because he famously, you know, supposedly did that to prove

462
00:25:38,160 --> 00:25:40,000
something about atheism. I don't know what it was. It

463
00:25:40,079 --> 00:25:43,079
was gross. But how come no callers are calling in

464
00:25:44,000 --> 00:25:48,720
to disprove Yakub and that he manifested wig Xantheum. That's

465
00:25:48,720 --> 00:25:51,759
because they can't, because the transcendental argument for Yakub is

466
00:25:51,799 --> 00:25:55,119
so strong. That's why you'll never see him call in.

467
00:26:00,880 --> 00:26:07,000
What's up, man, Go ahead, enchanted? Did you have any

468
00:26:07,079 --> 00:26:09,599
last comments? Yeah?

469
00:26:09,640 --> 00:26:13,079
Speaker 5: I just wanted to make a brief point. It seems

470
00:26:13,160 --> 00:26:19,359
that the Roman Catholic view, they have collapsed energies partially

471
00:26:19,400 --> 00:26:20,640
into the essence.

472
00:26:20,440 --> 00:26:23,599
Speaker 1: And into person and into person, and.

473
00:26:23,519 --> 00:26:25,240
Speaker 9: It's completely incoherence.

474
00:26:25,400 --> 00:26:25,640
Speaker 1: Yep.

475
00:26:25,839 --> 00:26:29,359
Speaker 5: And maybe somehow someone you know from the Orthodox sphere,

476
00:26:29,440 --> 00:26:32,960
could you know, make a video or something to actually,

477
00:26:33,960 --> 00:26:38,000
you know, deconstruct the Roman Catholic view and show how

478
00:26:38,440 --> 00:26:40,160
all these attributes that don't match up.

479
00:26:40,240 --> 00:26:42,720
Speaker 1: We've been we've been we've been making those videos. We've

480
00:26:42,759 --> 00:26:46,119
been making those videos for ten years, so uh go

481
00:26:46,200 --> 00:26:48,079
back to my series on that. Man. Yeah, we've been

482
00:26:48,119 --> 00:26:49,920
I mean I'm not distant you understanding, like we've been

483
00:26:49,920 --> 00:26:53,400
making those videos. They don't care, Like they don't like

484
00:26:53,480 --> 00:26:56,640
the Roman Catholic apologize by the ways dying, Like it's

485
00:26:56,680 --> 00:27:01,519
resorted now to like TikTok just gibberish. That's it. Like

486
00:27:01,720 --> 00:27:05,119
all Roman Catholic apologetics is TikTok gibberish. And Trent Horne's

487
00:27:05,319 --> 00:27:07,640
you know, low tier videos. I mean they're pretty much

488
00:27:07,640 --> 00:27:12,039
cook man. They have totally just had disaster after disaster

489
00:27:12,160 --> 00:27:15,000
in the last six months, whether it's Trent Doherty and

490
00:27:15,000 --> 00:27:17,559
although oh we're the same as the Muslims, God like

491
00:27:17,599 --> 00:27:22,079
all that was a massive flop. What was the last

492
00:27:22,079 --> 00:27:27,559
debate Alex Soren Yasi flopped bad. I mean they're cooked, dude.

493
00:27:27,559 --> 00:27:29,599
All they have is the low tier. All they have

494
00:27:29,799 --> 00:27:31,960
is the lowest common nominator, lowd tier stuff. That's all

495
00:27:32,000 --> 00:27:35,400
they do. Miss Roberts five dollars. What is the difference

496
00:27:35,400 --> 00:27:40,480
between Orthodox sex. I mean, there's not really Orthodox sex.

497
00:27:40,519 --> 00:27:42,759
There's a few groups that are like small groups that

498
00:27:42,839 --> 00:27:45,200
claim to be you know, true Orthodox, but I don't

499
00:27:45,240 --> 00:27:47,079
even think that's even comparable because that's just like a

500
00:27:47,119 --> 00:27:49,480
few thousand people in the world. I don't even think

501
00:27:49,519 --> 00:27:54,480
that's comparable to Protestant denominations. So but I wouldn't. We're

502
00:27:54,480 --> 00:27:57,960
not arguing that Orthodoxy is true because no one claims

503
00:27:58,000 --> 00:28:01,480
to be a sectarian. We're arguing and that Protestantism's own

504
00:28:01,559 --> 00:28:08,160
ecclesiology allows for multiple sects. Orthodox ecclesiology doesn't allow for that,

505
00:28:08,319 --> 00:28:09,960
even though there are some groups that claim to be

506
00:28:10,079 --> 00:28:11,279
Orthodox sects.

507
00:28:11,559 --> 00:28:13,599
Speaker 2: Yeah, and the only way these small little groups like

508
00:28:13,640 --> 00:28:15,839
genuine Orthodox and stuff like that are growing is just

509
00:28:15,839 --> 00:28:17,759
because people are going to the church thinking it's just

510
00:28:17,839 --> 00:28:18,720
regular Orthodox.

511
00:28:18,759 --> 00:28:20,759
Speaker 7: I don't know that it's like a schismatic sect.

512
00:28:20,799 --> 00:28:24,039
Speaker 1: Oh yeah, you hear what something?

513
00:28:24,839 --> 00:28:29,039
Speaker 10: Okay. So, as somebody who's wanting to get into online debating,

514
00:28:29,920 --> 00:28:32,640
I just want to know, how do I how would

515
00:28:32,680 --> 00:28:36,759
I determine if I'm engaging in Christian apologetics?

516
00:28:36,759 --> 00:28:38,400
Speaker 4: Like if I if.

517
00:28:38,200 --> 00:28:41,880
Speaker 10: I'm debating like let's say a secularist you know about

518
00:28:42,599 --> 00:28:45,359
you know, the existence of God, is that would that

519
00:28:45,400 --> 00:28:48,119
be considered engaging in Christian apologetics?

520
00:28:49,480 --> 00:28:50,799
Speaker 1: Well, I mean to be honest with you, I would

521
00:28:50,839 --> 00:28:55,480
say you got to be an Orthodox Christian like I mean,

522
00:28:56,480 --> 00:28:59,200
I know, I mean, I know there are apologists that

523
00:28:59,240 --> 00:29:02,599
are Protestants and Catholic and all that, but I mean,

524
00:29:03,480 --> 00:29:07,319
I mean, I can't support or you know, condone apologetics

525
00:29:07,359 --> 00:29:11,799
that isn't Orthodox. So I would say, I would say,

526
00:29:11,799 --> 00:29:14,480
I need a person needs to become Orthodox first and

527
00:29:14,519 --> 00:29:17,119
then kind of go through catechesis. And usually you know,

528
00:29:17,160 --> 00:29:20,599
people need a time period to not you know, immediately

529
00:29:20,599 --> 00:29:22,640
be debating when they're a Catechuman. There might be some

530
00:29:22,720 --> 00:29:24,839
exception to that, but usually it doesn't work out.

531
00:29:24,880 --> 00:29:25,119
Speaker 4: Good.

532
00:29:26,279 --> 00:29:31,599
Speaker 1: Okay, here we go, God, God, what's up? Um? There

533
00:29:31,599 --> 00:29:37,599
we go? We got Reddit Live. What's up? Man? God

534
00:29:37,680 --> 00:29:40,720
can't connect? I would think you would have omnipotent powers you,

535
00:29:42,680 --> 00:29:45,960
but God doesn't have a good cell connection apparently. You know,

536
00:29:45,960 --> 00:29:48,440
I'm not being blasphemous because this isn't actually God. By

537
00:29:48,440 --> 00:29:53,599
the way, Let's see we'll try somebody else. We got

538
00:29:53,599 --> 00:29:56,440
all these orthodox guys. Is there anybody disagrees? So every

539
00:29:56,480 --> 00:29:58,079
time I do a live stream, which I don't mind it,

540
00:29:58,079 --> 00:30:00,279
it's just because it's no more in my of them

541
00:30:00,359 --> 00:30:02,400
don't come atheists. It's all just piles up with all

542
00:30:02,400 --> 00:30:05,359
the Worthrow Bros. Which is fine, But it's like, does

543
00:30:05,400 --> 00:30:08,519
anybody in the chat disagree? There's still like almost twenty

544
00:30:08,559 --> 00:30:12,119
people give me like an emoji or something if you disagree,

545
00:30:12,119 --> 00:30:17,640
and I'll bring you up. Okay, kart krt, Cardi k

546
00:30:18,160 --> 00:30:24,799
he disagrees. What's up? Cardik? What was up?

547
00:30:24,799 --> 00:30:25,200
Speaker 4: I mute?

548
00:30:27,640 --> 00:30:28,200
Speaker 11: Anyamy?

549
00:30:28,440 --> 00:30:29,039
Speaker 1: Yeah, what's up?

550
00:30:30,960 --> 00:30:31,440
Speaker 12: Yeah?

551
00:30:32,640 --> 00:30:35,640
Speaker 9: I had a question of later took tag okay.

552
00:30:36,319 --> 00:30:40,680
Speaker 12: So I was watching na could debate with nold ax

553
00:30:40,759 --> 00:30:43,359
my bus and it was a.

554
00:30:43,400 --> 00:30:44,519
Speaker 4: Bit confused about.

555
00:30:45,960 --> 00:30:50,759
Speaker 12: Why that presents like a better alternative to let's say,

556
00:30:50,839 --> 00:30:53,960
just taking things as an assumption or taking things as

557
00:30:54,000 --> 00:30:55,599
Brett physically assumed.

558
00:30:56,759 --> 00:30:58,160
Speaker 9: So, for example, the.

559
00:30:58,160 --> 00:31:02,720
Speaker 12: Regularity of niche is just assuming the reduction happens.

560
00:31:03,720 --> 00:31:04,960
Speaker 1: Well, it is a better.

561
00:31:04,759 --> 00:31:05,240
Speaker 4: Thing to do.

562
00:31:05,920 --> 00:31:07,799
Speaker 1: I mean, you can't come to a debate and say, well,

563
00:31:07,799 --> 00:31:09,519
I just want to assume it. I mean, can I

564
00:31:09,519 --> 00:31:11,680
come to debate and say, well, I just assume God exists.

565
00:31:11,720 --> 00:31:16,200
Speaker 12: So debate's over, right, But like it was, more so,

566
00:31:17,799 --> 00:31:21,559
why is that a better alternative of what does it solve?

567
00:31:21,640 --> 00:31:22,039
Speaker 4: Exactly?

568
00:31:23,319 --> 00:31:25,400
Speaker 1: Well, if you read David Hume, for example, he argues

569
00:31:25,400 --> 00:31:28,680
that if you're an empiricist, you can't prove or justify induction.

570
00:31:29,279 --> 00:31:32,119
So the solution to that to just say, well, I

571
00:31:32,240 --> 00:31:35,400
just assume it. I mean, you don't see why that's

572
00:31:35,400 --> 00:31:38,880
philosophical nonsense to just I just assume it. I mean

573
00:31:38,880 --> 00:31:39,720
that's the thing in question.

574
00:31:39,920 --> 00:31:44,279
Speaker 12: Well, right, But so I guess what I'm trying to

575
00:31:44,359 --> 00:31:49,440
unascern is why does assuming the Christian God help explain

576
00:31:49,480 --> 00:31:49,960
that better?

577
00:31:51,079 --> 00:31:54,599
Speaker 1: Well, because if God exists, and if he's provident, then

578
00:31:54,680 --> 00:32:01,400
that explains why there's regularity in nature because of divine providence. Right,

579
00:32:02,039 --> 00:32:05,039
in a world where God exists, where there is a

580
00:32:05,119 --> 00:32:08,680
creator and a created order with intentionality and purpose, it

581
00:32:08,839 --> 00:32:11,480
makes sense why there would be regularity in nature. In

582
00:32:11,519 --> 00:32:15,519
a world where it's pure chaos and materialism, there is

583
00:32:15,559 --> 00:32:17,400
no justification for the regularity of nature.

584
00:32:19,240 --> 00:32:21,519
Speaker 12: So by it makes sense, what do you mean in

585
00:32:21,559 --> 00:32:23,960
the context.

586
00:32:23,480 --> 00:32:27,960
Speaker 1: That it's justified incoherent? It makes sense in a sense

587
00:32:27,960 --> 00:32:31,640
of it being purposeful and intentional because the world has order,

588
00:32:31,720 --> 00:32:34,400
the world has Tello's purpose, and it has an end.

589
00:32:34,799 --> 00:32:37,880
In a world without all of that, it doesn't make sense.

590
00:32:38,079 --> 00:32:45,319
It's incoherent, Okay, So just saying that it like it's

591
00:32:45,440 --> 00:32:46,039
nested in.

592
00:32:46,039 --> 00:32:52,960
Speaker 12: A another criteria I fits the world being moreculological being

593
00:32:52,960 --> 00:32:56,519
what illlllogical like having a purpose.

594
00:32:57,400 --> 00:33:00,319
Speaker 1: Yeah, I'm saying all of those metaphysical ideas that our

595
00:33:00,480 --> 00:33:04,839
part and parcel with a Christian metaphysic makes sense of

596
00:33:05,039 --> 00:33:09,039
induction in the regulative nature and thus the possibility of knowledge.

597
00:33:09,400 --> 00:33:12,400
But the other worldview, where there's none of that, it

598
00:33:12,440 --> 00:33:14,880
doesn't make sense and there is no justification. That's a

599
00:33:15,079 --> 00:33:21,119
that's a pretty strong argument, I would say. So it's

600
00:33:21,119 --> 00:33:24,240
an argument comparing world views on the question of induction.

601
00:33:24,480 --> 00:33:25,440
That is the argument.

602
00:33:28,319 --> 00:33:33,759
Speaker 12: All right, So, okay, I guess pardon me, but I'm

603
00:33:33,759 --> 00:33:37,799
still a bit confused on it. It makes more sense

604
00:33:38,839 --> 00:33:41,359
because it's more core.

605
00:33:42,160 --> 00:33:46,160
Speaker 1: Yeah, there's coherence and incoherence. Correct. The argument here is

606
00:33:46,200 --> 00:33:52,359
partly hinging on coherence. Correct. But it's not just it's

607
00:33:52,400 --> 00:33:55,799
not just any kind of It's not just any kind

608
00:33:55,839 --> 00:34:00,200
of coherence. It's coherence in regard to something that is

609
00:34:00,240 --> 00:34:04,519
so fundamental to knowledge that it's a precondition of knowledge.

610
00:34:04,559 --> 00:34:08,760
You couldn't have knowledge if there weren't the principle of induction. Right, So,

611
00:34:08,800 --> 00:34:11,599
in other words, it's not just denying any kind of thing,

612
00:34:11,679 --> 00:34:15,039
it's denying something so fundamental that to deny it would

613
00:34:15,039 --> 00:34:17,960
make knowledge impossible, and that's why it's a strong argument.

614
00:34:20,679 --> 00:34:25,440
Speaker 12: H So you're saying that without those assumptions, O, without

615
00:34:25,440 --> 00:34:27,199
this world you knowledge itself.

616
00:34:26,920 --> 00:34:28,320
Speaker 4: Is not very possible.

617
00:34:28,519 --> 00:34:32,159
Speaker 1: Yes, correct, mm hmm.

618
00:34:35,880 --> 00:34:36,920
Speaker 12: Okay, let's.

619
00:34:38,599 --> 00:34:41,920
Speaker 1: That is the argument exactly right there. It's an argument

620
00:34:42,000 --> 00:34:43,000
about worldviews.

621
00:34:45,320 --> 00:34:50,199
Speaker 12: Oh okay, one small question this, So sure would you,

622
00:34:50,320 --> 00:34:55,559
but wouldn't that still assume like coherence theory before any

623
00:34:55,599 --> 00:34:58,079
of your assumptions or any of your no.

624
00:34:58,280 --> 00:35:02,840
Speaker 1: Coherence theory is a is a epistemology that treats every

625
00:35:03,039 --> 00:35:06,480
belief as foundational. So it's a form of foundationalism that

626
00:35:06,760 --> 00:35:09,119
treats everything as a foundational belief. It's just it only

627
00:35:09,159 --> 00:35:12,840
differs from foundationalism in the sense that there's not specific

628
00:35:14,159 --> 00:35:17,239
beliefs that are foundational. So it's not coherence theory in

629
00:35:17,280 --> 00:35:21,000
a secular epistemic sense. I'm arguing that the Christian metaphysic

630
00:35:21,119 --> 00:35:24,639
as a whole is coherent and gives a place for

631
00:35:24,840 --> 00:35:29,840
in a basis for a justification for induction, whereas the

632
00:35:29,880 --> 00:35:34,239
atheist metaphysic and worldview does not. So no, it is

633
00:35:34,280 --> 00:35:37,119
not relying on some secular coherence theory, but it is

634
00:35:37,159 --> 00:35:40,280
relying on all kinds of things. Sure, but we're arguing

635
00:35:40,320 --> 00:35:43,360
that every position relies on things. So the argument is

636
00:35:43,440 --> 00:35:47,320
premised on the atheist view relies on induction. The Christian

637
00:35:47,360 --> 00:35:50,440
view relies on induction. Only the Christian worldview as a

638
00:35:50,440 --> 00:35:54,400
whole can make sense of induction, whereas the atheist worldview

639
00:35:54,400 --> 00:36:00,519
makes induction and knowledge impossible. It's not an arguments saying

640
00:36:00,559 --> 00:36:03,320
that we don't assume things and you do. The argument

641
00:36:03,400 --> 00:36:12,800
is is argument everyone assumes things. Okay, yeah, great questions.

642
00:36:12,760 --> 00:36:15,480
So I appreciate that. I mean, I welcome, and I

643
00:36:15,519 --> 00:36:17,440
thank you for being, you know, civil, and a lot

644
00:36:17,480 --> 00:36:19,039
of these people are not very civil when it comes

645
00:36:19,079 --> 00:36:23,440
to this topic. But feel free to interject Nick if

646
00:36:23,440 --> 00:36:25,880
you'd like to. And by the way, everybody's being very generous.

647
00:36:25,880 --> 00:36:27,599
Thank you. I'm gonna share the super chats with Nick.

648
00:36:27,679 --> 00:36:28,599
So I appreciate all that.

649
00:36:29,400 --> 00:36:30,760
Speaker 7: Wow a little guy man.

650
00:36:32,320 --> 00:36:35,119
Speaker 1: Uh yeah, we're doing very very nice on super chests already.

651
00:36:36,679 --> 00:36:42,360
We got uh Chadner, excuse me, free reign, says my

652
00:36:42,360 --> 00:36:48,559
my Ricci family like Christina Ricci, Saint Catherine de Ricci,

653
00:36:49,079 --> 00:36:55,079
who is a history onic hysterical woman, Mateo Lorenzo Ricci,

654
00:36:55,960 --> 00:37:01,920
my great grandfather was or with King Romberto stood up

655
00:37:01,920 --> 00:37:05,360
to the Venetians who infested the Vatican. Oh that's interesting.

656
00:37:05,360 --> 00:37:10,480
I didn't know there was a Richy drama opposing the Venetians.

657
00:37:11,039 --> 00:37:14,400
Bootmun twenty dollars. Have your birthday, Jay, Your work was

658
00:37:14,480 --> 00:37:18,159
critical for me to stay Orthodox during a very spiritual

659
00:37:18,239 --> 00:37:21,320
low point. Yeah, just persevere. I think everybody you know

660
00:37:21,320 --> 00:37:23,400
you're going to hit spiritual low points no matter who

661
00:37:23,400 --> 00:37:26,159
you are in your journey. Just try to stay, you know,

662
00:37:26,239 --> 00:37:29,880
consistent with attending the liturgy. Croatian five dollars. Can you

663
00:37:29,920 --> 00:37:34,000
explain the difference between being in person? Can you put

664
00:37:34,039 --> 00:37:36,480
me to resources on this idea? Maybe your contemporary stuff

665
00:37:36,599 --> 00:37:40,039
Orthodox elogians, I mean the best contemporary theologians are like

666
00:37:41,199 --> 00:37:43,800
you could read Fluorofsky where he talks about the energies

667
00:37:43,840 --> 00:37:47,800
and some of his writings. But doctor David Bradshaw's books

668
00:37:47,840 --> 00:37:51,000
Aersault East and West and the Divine Energies book that

669
00:37:51,039 --> 00:37:54,880
he has a separate little book of essays. Read Anything

670
00:37:54,920 --> 00:37:58,360
by Vladimir Lawsky is good. But I mean, being is

671
00:37:58,360 --> 00:38:02,239
a very generic term in philosophy and patristics, and it

672
00:38:02,320 --> 00:38:05,800
really kind of is synonymous with existence or you know,

673
00:38:05,960 --> 00:38:08,840
ontology it's just kind of a it's used in different ways.

674
00:38:08,840 --> 00:38:12,320
When the church fathers are Polemaster, people speak of God's being,

675
00:38:12,559 --> 00:38:15,079
that's called an energy as well. So God's existence is

676
00:38:15,119 --> 00:38:22,840
an energy. So person is subject or agent in Orthodox Christology.

677
00:38:22,960 --> 00:38:25,840
Speaker 2: Yeah, and I actually did an interview with doctor David

678
00:38:25,840 --> 00:38:27,920
Bradshaw my channel a whole out of a year ago.

679
00:38:28,000 --> 00:38:31,000
Speaker 7: If you can check that out as well, and my help.

680
00:38:31,039 --> 00:38:32,599
Speaker 2: I think we talked about person and being in there

681
00:38:32,599 --> 00:38:34,119
a little bit, but we just talked about some of

682
00:38:34,119 --> 00:38:36,199
the major objections and what it is to understand a

683
00:38:36,199 --> 00:38:36,760
little bit better.

684
00:38:36,800 --> 00:38:38,159
Speaker 7: So whoever that person was.

685
00:38:38,760 --> 00:38:40,960
Speaker 1: Yeah, So you could check out Nick's interview, and I

686
00:38:41,039 --> 00:38:43,360
also have an interview with doctor Bradshaw as well from

687
00:38:43,400 --> 00:38:45,559
four or five years ago on Essen's Interduceinction two. So

688
00:38:45,559 --> 00:38:48,280
I think you got you guys would like that. Dan

689
00:38:48,360 --> 00:38:52,400
Good five dollars, Dan Pott our dollars, quick question. Do

690
00:38:52,440 --> 00:38:57,119
you believe in actus purists? And if not? Why? Yeah? So,

691
00:38:57,239 --> 00:39:00,719
John Damascus and Gregor Palomus they talk about God as

692
00:39:01,719 --> 00:39:05,480
in his essence or in terms of his in his

693
00:39:05,760 --> 00:39:09,559
eternal existence. God is in a sense, you could say,

694
00:39:09,559 --> 00:39:12,679
pure act in contrast to the created order. But you

695
00:39:12,719 --> 00:39:16,159
cannot reduce the divine persons or the divine energies to

696
00:39:16,280 --> 00:39:18,599
pure act. And the reason for that, first and foremost

697
00:39:18,639 --> 00:39:21,480
is that we believe in apathetic theology. So to call

698
00:39:21,519 --> 00:39:24,440
the divine essence pure act would number one be not apathetic.

699
00:39:24,480 --> 00:39:27,000
It would be a cataphatic attribution to the divine, to

700
00:39:27,039 --> 00:39:30,320
the divine essence, and also a divine being that is

701
00:39:30,599 --> 00:39:32,840
reduced to pure act. Especially if you reduce the persons

702
00:39:32,840 --> 00:39:35,719
to pure act like Rome does. You can't have one

703
00:39:36,119 --> 00:39:39,840
person incarnate in time and space and engage in kenosis

704
00:39:39,920 --> 00:39:43,480
or self limitation, as Philippians two says, and maintain a

705
00:39:43,519 --> 00:39:46,679
God that is reducible to pure act. So that's one. Also,

706
00:39:46,679 --> 00:39:49,280
the God that is pure act doesn't create because pure

707
00:39:49,320 --> 00:39:52,880
actuality must, according to Ariosotol, always have something else that actualizes.

708
00:39:53,360 --> 00:39:57,519
And Aristotle's reason this out to mean diet right. The

709
00:39:57,559 --> 00:40:01,079
first actualizer must always have something other than himself that

710
00:40:01,119 --> 00:40:06,719
he eternally actualizes, Otherwise what is he actualizing? And that's

711
00:40:06,760 --> 00:40:08,519
what led Aristotle to a diad. And if you read

712
00:40:08,599 --> 00:40:12,159
Besilos Examron, he critiques this as a nonsense position. And

713
00:40:12,199 --> 00:40:14,360
that's why we don't reduce God to pure act. But

714
00:40:15,079 --> 00:40:17,599
there is a way of speaking of God that. For example,

715
00:40:17,599 --> 00:40:20,519
I three the first five pages of Saint Maximus's two

716
00:40:20,519 --> 00:40:24,000
interred chapters, he says, you can call God first cause

717
00:40:24,039 --> 00:40:27,880
and first act in contrast to the creator order, saying

718
00:40:27,960 --> 00:40:30,880
a great Renald Sandozows says the exact same thing. He says,

719
00:40:31,079 --> 00:40:34,639
in the sense of the Trinity being contrasted to the creation,

720
00:40:35,320 --> 00:40:38,679
the Trinity is the monarch of creation. You can't take

721
00:40:38,719 --> 00:40:43,360
the economic attributions and import those into the intratrinitarian life.

722
00:40:43,440 --> 00:40:45,880
For example, you can't call the divine essence the first

723
00:40:45,920 --> 00:40:48,840
cause of the Trinity. You can't call the entire triad

724
00:40:49,119 --> 00:40:52,679
the first cause of the Trinity. Only the Father in

725
00:40:52,719 --> 00:40:55,800
the intratrinitarian life is the first cause. So you see

726
00:40:55,800 --> 00:41:00,159
how this terminology gets confused between economic predication of God

727
00:41:00,400 --> 00:41:03,519
an intratrinitarian life predication of God. And this is a

728
00:41:03,519 --> 00:41:06,440
common mistake the Roman Catholics make, not just with the

729
00:41:06,440 --> 00:41:09,840
Philly oquay, but with naming God in general. And again, yeah,

730
00:41:10,000 --> 00:41:14,039
first five pages, two inter chapters, Maximus explicitly makes this

731
00:41:14,239 --> 00:41:17,039
distinction between two ways of naming God, God in contrasted

732
00:41:17,119 --> 00:41:20,559
creatures and God in contrast God in the intratrendary in life.

733
00:41:21,159 --> 00:41:22,920
Speaker 2: Yeah, so I think a lot of the times people

734
00:41:23,000 --> 00:41:26,280
like notice pure act, like it just the first thing

735
00:41:26,280 --> 00:41:28,719
people think is, okay, he has passive potency and active

736
00:41:28,800 --> 00:41:29,519
active potency.

737
00:41:29,599 --> 00:41:31,119
Speaker 7: Does he have any passive at all?

738
00:41:31,199 --> 00:41:32,960
Speaker 2: Well, I mean, obviously we don't think that, like in

739
00:41:33,000 --> 00:41:35,239
accordance to creation needn't change how we do it in

740
00:41:35,239 --> 00:41:38,239
any ways, like because none of his essential properties are

741
00:41:38,280 --> 00:41:39,920
going to stop being essential properties.

742
00:41:39,960 --> 00:41:41,840
Speaker 7: He doesn't have things like accidental properties.

743
00:41:41,840 --> 00:41:45,039
Speaker 2: And a lot of times when people talk about pure act,

744
00:41:45,039 --> 00:41:46,440
that's all they mean, Yeah, exactly.

745
00:41:46,599 --> 00:41:48,639
Speaker 7: They canto account everything that it has to do with.

746
00:41:49,360 --> 00:41:51,639
Speaker 1: Also, there's a thing that people years ago took me

747
00:41:51,679 --> 00:41:54,119
out of context to say that I was saying that

748
00:41:54,159 --> 00:41:58,199
God is determined or affected by creatures because we were

749
00:41:58,199 --> 00:42:01,000
talking about passive potency, and what I was saying was

750
00:42:01,280 --> 00:42:03,599
not in the sense of like in himself. No, God

751
00:42:03,679 --> 00:42:07,559
is not changed or acted upon by creatures. However, there

752
00:42:07,599 --> 00:42:10,840
is a great essay I think it's a Bradshaw's longer

753
00:42:10,960 --> 00:42:14,199
essay on the concept of divine energies, where there's a

754
00:42:14,199 --> 00:42:18,400
section where he critiques the Tomistic and Augusitian notion of

755
00:42:18,480 --> 00:42:22,519
if God is reducible to his essence. Then you have

756
00:42:22,599 --> 00:42:27,519
a problem with prayer because prayer in divine revelation, God

757
00:42:27,679 --> 00:42:31,320
does react to creatures into prayer. And there's a really

758
00:42:31,360 --> 00:42:34,760
powerful critique that Bradshaw does of ads where he says,

759
00:42:34,920 --> 00:42:38,840
if God is this, there isn't an interaction to prayer.

760
00:42:39,159 --> 00:42:42,199
So what's the solution to this. Well, Bradshaw says in

761
00:42:42,400 --> 00:42:48,400
the economia, God condescends to will to react to creatures

762
00:42:48,480 --> 00:42:50,320
in terms of their prayers. And hence, if you read

763
00:42:50,320 --> 00:42:53,039
the Book of Amos, for example, God says to Amos,

764
00:42:53,480 --> 00:42:55,440
if you had not prayed for Israel, I would have

765
00:42:55,480 --> 00:42:59,559
destroyed it. But since you did intercede for Israel, I'm

766
00:42:59,559 --> 00:43:03,400
not going to destroy it. That means God condescends to

767
00:43:03,639 --> 00:43:07,159
will to react to creatures. It does not mean the

768
00:43:07,199 --> 00:43:11,480
divine essence is affected or changed by creatures. And they

769
00:43:11,480 --> 00:43:14,360
took me out of context when all I did was

770
00:43:14,400 --> 00:43:16,960
repeat what Bradshaw argues. So the dyer says that God

771
00:43:17,000 --> 00:43:19,000
has passive potency and he's changed more creatures.

772
00:43:19,320 --> 00:43:21,599
Speaker 2: It's funny because I literally get people like in my

773
00:43:21,719 --> 00:43:24,199
life probably Muslims all the time, that are like, you know,

774
00:43:24,320 --> 00:43:26,199
Jay doesn't believe in pure act He thinks God has

775
00:43:26,360 --> 00:43:28,760
you know, passive potency and all this. I'm like, I

776
00:43:28,800 --> 00:43:31,000
can almost guarantee you're clearing amount of context.

777
00:43:31,800 --> 00:43:31,960
Speaker 12: No.

778
00:43:31,800 --> 00:43:36,639
Speaker 1: No, So so if you read uh Pino's dissertation right,

779
00:43:36,760 --> 00:43:40,239
he says, Palamas does say that you can speak of

780
00:43:40,239 --> 00:43:45,280
God as pure act meaning that there's no unrealized you know,

781
00:43:45,440 --> 00:43:49,760
like deficiency or lacking God. And that's still in contrast

782
00:43:49,960 --> 00:43:56,440
to the temporal, created, finite limited lacking things to the

783
00:43:56,559 --> 00:44:00,679
created order. But you can't say the divine sense is

784
00:44:00,800 --> 00:44:03,840
pure act which is what Thomism says. For example, actress

785
00:44:03,880 --> 00:44:07,280
puros Actions Puis Thomas says God is in his essence

786
00:44:07,360 --> 00:44:12,920
absolutely identical to pure actuality. That is very problematic for

787
00:44:13,159 --> 00:44:16,079
Orthodox theology and for any kind of Trinitarian theology. It

788
00:44:16,159 --> 00:44:20,400
really negates the trinity, not just that, it also makes

789
00:44:20,440 --> 00:44:23,519
the incarnation impossible. And you'll notice every time I brought

790
00:44:23,559 --> 00:44:26,239
this up with Roman Catholic theologians and Thomas, when they

791
00:44:26,239 --> 00:44:29,320
call in and I say, let's say, you're right, fine,

792
00:44:29,400 --> 00:44:34,000
God is absolutely simple essence, irre and reducible to isomorphically

793
00:44:34,039 --> 00:44:38,280
identical to pure actuality. Now explain to me how one

794
00:44:38,360 --> 00:44:43,519
hypostasis of pure actuality enters into time and space and

795
00:44:43,960 --> 00:44:47,920
willfully limits himself a llah the Canosis Passage of Philippians two.

796
00:44:48,559 --> 00:44:50,480
They have no idea what I'm talking. They don't know

797
00:44:50,960 --> 00:44:55,440
because they do their metaphysics irrespective of Christology. Orthodox theology

798
00:44:55,480 --> 00:44:59,519
is the reverse. Our metaphysics is based on trinity and Christology,

799
00:44:59,679 --> 00:45:02,719
not metaphysics that then determines the trinity. That's all atomism

800
00:45:02,840 --> 00:45:07,840
right there. Octavian twenty dollars. If a Mormon and a

801
00:45:07,840 --> 00:45:12,559
Calvinist walk into a Catholic church, will the mom give

802
00:45:12,599 --> 00:45:18,039
them communion? It may if they're at the churches in Germany,

803
00:45:18,159 --> 00:45:22,639
probably banana up to but fifty dollars. Thank you for

804
00:45:22,679 --> 00:45:26,960
being such a generous, you know, wealthy super chatter fifty bucks.

805
00:45:27,199 --> 00:45:30,880
I wonder if the Muslim debates, Wait you mean, I'm

806
00:45:30,920 --> 00:45:33,639
wondering with these Muslim debates, if you guys ever bring

807
00:45:33,719 --> 00:45:39,920
up the diacritical dots issues and the seven different readings,

808
00:45:39,920 --> 00:45:42,360
I'm curious how I know how they would respond to that.

809
00:45:42,800 --> 00:45:46,559
Diacritical dots actually change the letters in Arabic into different

810
00:45:46,559 --> 00:45:49,239
words and meanings. I'm not familiar with this argument. Have

811
00:45:49,239 --> 00:45:49,960
you heard this argument?

812
00:45:50,199 --> 00:45:52,079
Speaker 2: Yeah? I think he's referring to the fact they have

813
00:45:52,239 --> 00:45:55,760
like different variants of the text, where like some will

814
00:45:55,800 --> 00:45:59,639
say that like I created something, or someone will say

815
00:45:59,639 --> 00:46:02,280
like you created something, and so it's clearly referring to

816
00:46:02,320 --> 00:46:05,400
different subjects. And so there's some textual variants that are

817
00:46:05,400 --> 00:46:08,840
considered like major textual variants that they don't know exactly

818
00:46:08,920 --> 00:46:11,239
which one it's supposed to be. So the whole one

819
00:46:11,320 --> 00:46:12,880
Quran argument kind of falls apart.

820
00:46:13,119 --> 00:46:16,159
Speaker 1: Oh so this is even after Outhlin, right, yes, after

821
00:46:16,800 --> 00:46:20,440
a moment and with this, remember when there was a

822
00:46:21,840 --> 00:46:24,400
some drama over was it Muhammed hit job when he

823
00:46:24,440 --> 00:46:27,440
was admitting that the Koran isn't free from textual variance?

824
00:46:27,519 --> 00:46:29,119
Was that Remember that a few years ago there's like

825
00:46:29,119 --> 00:46:32,480
a rally, maybe it was Ali Dawa, one of those

826
00:46:32,519 --> 00:46:34,320
guys you know, admitted this and it was like a

827
00:46:34,400 --> 00:46:36,000
huge deal and they were all freaking out.

828
00:46:36,400 --> 00:46:38,039
Speaker 2: I mean, it's true if you actually are being honest.

829
00:46:38,039 --> 00:46:40,840
I mean, there's there's obvious variants there, unless you just

830
00:46:40,880 --> 00:46:43,800
decide to stick with one specific variant, say that's the

831
00:46:43,840 --> 00:46:44,199
only one.

832
00:46:44,199 --> 00:46:45,760
Speaker 7: But I don't think it's a justification for that.

833
00:46:45,920 --> 00:46:50,079
Speaker 1: Okay, Lean, three dollars have your worth day?

834
00:46:50,159 --> 00:46:50,280
Speaker 4: Jay?

835
00:46:50,360 --> 00:46:53,119
Speaker 1: What order of books is the best to read the Bible? Uh,

836
00:46:53,440 --> 00:46:56,639
so that it isn't confusing, honestly. I mean I would

837
00:46:56,639 --> 00:46:59,519
start with Genesis. I mean, it's going to be difficult,

838
00:46:59,559 --> 00:47:03,719
but you really can't understand the New Testament without, you know,

839
00:47:03,800 --> 00:47:06,360
the Torah, so it is really important to read the Torah.

840
00:47:06,599 --> 00:47:08,559
I would get Orthodox study Bible and just you know,

841
00:47:08,679 --> 00:47:10,440
start from the beginning and you know, read all the

842
00:47:10,480 --> 00:47:11,559
notes because it's going to help you.

843
00:47:12,800 --> 00:47:12,960
Speaker 13: Uh.

844
00:47:13,800 --> 00:47:16,280
Speaker 1: Sergeia, it's fifty bucks man. You guys are being so generous.

845
00:47:16,280 --> 00:47:19,079
Thank you so much, he says, Happy birthday, big dog.

846
00:47:19,320 --> 00:47:22,960
Happy birthday to you man. Even though it's not your birthday,

847
00:47:23,159 --> 00:47:26,960
it could be. How about merry Christmas since technically it's

848
00:47:26,960 --> 00:47:33,519
still kind of Orthodox Christ. All right, let's see who's next.

849
00:47:35,000 --> 00:47:38,360
Any disagrees, By the way, we still got we still

850
00:47:38,400 --> 00:47:41,559
got twenty people in here. Give me an emoji if

851
00:47:41,559 --> 00:47:44,039
you do. Okay, So here here's some my Amanda disagrees.

852
00:47:44,079 --> 00:47:57,559
What's up, Amanda? You gotta I'm mute? What's up, Amanda? Amanda?

853
00:47:57,599 --> 00:47:59,559
I'm youte that sure?

854
00:47:59,760 --> 00:48:02,280
Speaker 4: So right now, a mute check.

855
00:48:02,639 --> 00:48:04,760
Speaker 1: Even though it's not a dude, I mean, I guess

856
00:48:04,800 --> 00:48:07,400
you could be a dude named Amanda. Are you there?

857
00:48:08,320 --> 00:48:09,400
Did you? Hey?

858
00:48:09,440 --> 00:48:10,199
Speaker 4: Can you guys hear me?

859
00:48:10,800 --> 00:48:12,280
Speaker 1: Amanda's a dude? What's up?

860
00:48:14,079 --> 00:48:14,440
Speaker 4: Sorry?

861
00:48:14,480 --> 00:48:16,800
Speaker 14: Man, my wife made this profile for us.

862
00:48:16,880 --> 00:48:18,000
Speaker 1: I'm just kidding. What's up? Man?

863
00:48:19,320 --> 00:48:19,639
Speaker 4: Man?

864
00:48:19,960 --> 00:48:20,480
Speaker 9: Uh?

865
00:48:21,239 --> 00:48:22,960
Speaker 4: I wanted to give you a little bit of pushback.

866
00:48:23,000 --> 00:48:26,360
Speaker 5: I guess for your birthday or it says it's your birthday.

867
00:48:27,079 --> 00:48:27,679
Speaker 4: Uh.

868
00:48:27,840 --> 00:48:33,079
Speaker 14: We just recently left Baptist Church. I grew up Fundamental Baptist,

869
00:48:34,119 --> 00:48:37,280
but we've been we've been attending an antioaki in Orthodox Church,

870
00:48:37,760 --> 00:48:42,719
and certain parts of the liturgy I noticed when they're

871
00:48:42,760 --> 00:48:46,559
talking about theo Toko say mentioned save.

872
00:48:46,400 --> 00:48:47,960
Speaker 4: Us or save save me.

873
00:48:48,920 --> 00:48:52,239
Speaker 14: I guess the last little bit hanging up on me

874
00:48:52,320 --> 00:48:54,840
as a Protestant would be like, how could you argue

875
00:48:54,880 --> 00:48:59,039
that that's not like a statement to her to save us?

876
00:48:59,280 --> 00:49:01,840
Speaker 1: Yeah. So it's just like when Paul says to Timothy,

877
00:49:01,960 --> 00:49:06,000
if you act godly and are faithful, you will save

878
00:49:06,079 --> 00:49:08,440
those around you. Right, it's not saying that Timothy is

879
00:49:08,480 --> 00:49:12,320
the ultimate savior. And sometimes this cynthology is called middle salvation,

880
00:49:12,960 --> 00:49:15,039
and it just means just like with Amos. Right, you've

881
00:49:15,079 --> 00:49:17,800
read the Book of Amos, Amos saved Israel. Oh, I

882
00:49:17,800 --> 00:49:20,480
guess the Amos is replacing Jesus. No, it just means

883
00:49:20,480 --> 00:49:24,760
that God was using that means to save Israel. Right. So,

884
00:49:24,800 --> 00:49:27,440
in the same way that Theotokos saved us in that

885
00:49:27,480 --> 00:49:30,880
she's the mother of God, she's the mother of you know, Jesus,

886
00:49:31,840 --> 00:49:34,239
the divine person of the Sun, in the sense that

887
00:49:34,320 --> 00:49:37,559
she gave him his human nature, and that she acquiesced

888
00:49:37,679 --> 00:49:41,400
to the you know, let it be done according to

889
00:49:41,440 --> 00:49:44,159
Thy will. So she acquiesced, and in that sense she

890
00:49:44,440 --> 00:49:47,920
saved us, not that she is the ultimate cause of salvation.

891
00:49:48,400 --> 00:49:53,320
She's the proximate cause of salvation, just like your Monica

892
00:49:53,400 --> 00:49:56,719
prays for Sant Augustine. Right, So his mom, Saint Monica,

893
00:49:57,239 --> 00:50:00,639
saved Augustine through her prayers, not as the old toimate cause.

894
00:50:00,760 --> 00:50:05,840
That's all it means. Anything you want to say on that, Nick, I.

895
00:50:05,719 --> 00:50:07,199
Speaker 7: Mean, no, I agree. That's what I was going to

896
00:50:07,199 --> 00:50:08,480
bring up the prayer example too.

897
00:50:08,519 --> 00:50:11,039
Speaker 2: If I pray for someone to go to church, right,

898
00:50:11,119 --> 00:50:14,239
and then we would have to say as Christians that

899
00:50:14,280 --> 00:50:16,639
God is actually hearing our prayers, and our prayers can

900
00:50:16,679 --> 00:50:19,239
be efficacious. So if I pray for someone to go

901
00:50:19,239 --> 00:50:22,079
to church and somehow those prayers affect him in a

902
00:50:22,119 --> 00:50:24,280
way to go to church. He goes to church and

903
00:50:24,360 --> 00:50:28,159
ends up being saved. Well, my prayers saved him. Am

904
00:50:28,199 --> 00:50:31,159
I this savior? Though, do I, like you said, replace God?

905
00:50:31,280 --> 00:50:31,360
Speaker 13: No?

906
00:50:31,880 --> 00:50:34,920
Speaker 7: God used me as a tool as an instrument to pray.

907
00:50:35,599 --> 00:50:39,320
Speaker 2: It's like, as an example my prescape one time, it's like,

908
00:50:39,360 --> 00:50:42,360
imagine like God is running a hot dog stand, right, and.

909
00:50:42,760 --> 00:50:45,400
Speaker 7: He's given out hot dogs. He's hot dogs a salvation.

910
00:50:45,440 --> 00:50:47,400
Speaker 2: But the only way that you can get one is

911
00:50:47,400 --> 00:50:49,320
you got to walk by the hot dog stand. So

912
00:50:49,400 --> 00:50:52,239
he's given him out. Either way, nothing changes in him.

913
00:50:52,760 --> 00:50:54,880
But the only thing that changes is whether or not

914
00:50:55,000 --> 00:50:57,119
you receive one, which is about if you take the

915
00:50:57,159 --> 00:51:00,000
hot dog. Now, that doesn't mean that you cause yourself

916
00:51:00,519 --> 00:51:02,119
or tell you say, you told a friend go to

917
00:51:02,159 --> 00:51:04,800
the hot dog stand, you save them because if you

918
00:51:04,840 --> 00:51:05,400
didn't tell them to.

919
00:51:05,360 --> 00:51:06,840
Speaker 7: Go to hot lack stand, they wouldn't have gone.

920
00:51:07,039 --> 00:51:09,960
Speaker 2: But the ultimate salvation is what comes from the actual

921
00:51:10,000 --> 00:51:11,639
hot dog stand owner is giving it out in the

922
00:51:11,639 --> 00:51:12,159
first place.

923
00:51:12,599 --> 00:51:16,559
Speaker 1: Exactly Anonymous ten dollars and Jay You argued that onom

924
00:51:16,599 --> 00:51:20,840
sanctum says all Catholics are temporily subject to the Pope

925
00:51:20,880 --> 00:51:27,679
to be saved correct, and there's a forged bull sped

926
00:51:28,039 --> 00:51:32,119
spread by King Philip that the Pope claimed feudal control

927
00:51:32,199 --> 00:51:36,800
of France. Bonavas denied this and its claims. Now, I

928
00:51:36,800 --> 00:51:39,639
hope you're not saying that Unum sanctum is a forged bull,

929
00:51:39,880 --> 00:51:43,800
because it's not. In fact, Unum sanctum is still sighted

930
00:51:43,840 --> 00:51:47,559
in Denzinger, So that's total nonsense. But and by the way,

931
00:51:48,199 --> 00:51:52,119
Pius the ninth, as we argued multiple times in Lamentabiley

932
00:51:52,199 --> 00:51:55,159
and the syllabus of Errors, restates that you still have

933
00:51:55,239 --> 00:51:57,719
to believe in the temporal supremacy doctrine all the way

934
00:51:57,760 --> 00:52:00,800
up until Vatican One. That state of the papacy is

935
00:52:00,840 --> 00:52:04,719
still dogmatic in binding. So the way that you worded

936
00:52:04,760 --> 00:52:06,599
this is a little ambiguous, because I don't know if

937
00:52:06,639 --> 00:52:09,480
you mean that when them signed them as a forgeabull,

938
00:52:09,559 --> 00:52:11,800
because I've never heard Roman Calolque say this. It's still

939
00:52:11,840 --> 00:52:15,440
cited in Catholic dogmatic authoritative sources. Or if you're saying

940
00:52:15,480 --> 00:52:20,800
there's a separate bull that is claiming feudal control, and

941
00:52:22,360 --> 00:52:24,079
let's say for this say it's not. But let's say

942
00:52:24,119 --> 00:52:26,960
for the sake of argument, you're correct Okay, Well, then

943
00:52:27,239 --> 00:52:31,639
why is Pious the Ninth sighting and reaffirming a forged bull? Right,

944
00:52:31,760 --> 00:52:33,239
So that would mean that Piaus the Ninth made a

945
00:52:33,320 --> 00:52:35,159
huge error. He didn't even know his own documents in

946
00:52:35,159 --> 00:52:38,920
his own church history. Nico three dollars Jay Cradle Orthodox.

947
00:52:40,239 --> 00:52:43,760
I went Protestant, but I'm now back to Orthodoxy. I

948
00:52:43,800 --> 00:52:50,119
got an Orthodox calendar about feast days. I've been fasting Wednesday, Friday,

949
00:52:50,159 --> 00:52:55,639
et cetera. Is the non lent Easter fast something that

950
00:52:55,719 --> 00:52:58,800
you do? I mean, I have medical issues and so

951
00:52:58,920 --> 00:53:01,480
we do fast, but it's not exactly the same as

952
00:53:01,519 --> 00:53:05,679
everyone's fast. But you should take up fasting and all

953
00:53:05,719 --> 00:53:08,679
that with your spiritual father, because that's going to be

954
00:53:08,719 --> 00:53:11,480
determined between you and him. I don't give spiritual advice

955
00:53:11,519 --> 00:53:14,920
to people. Marco ten dollars jay am Orthodox. I mean

956
00:53:15,559 --> 00:53:19,400
hearing an argument that the Orthodox Church is not universal

957
00:53:20,360 --> 00:53:23,440
because there is an ep MP schism. How would you

958
00:53:23,480 --> 00:53:26,239
argue against this? Well, this is an easy one right away.

959
00:53:26,760 --> 00:53:30,480
If a schism between patriarchts means that the church is

960
00:53:30,519 --> 00:53:33,159
no longer universal, then the Roman Catholic Church is not

961
00:53:33,280 --> 00:53:36,519
universal because there were schisms amongst the patriarchs in the

962
00:53:36,519 --> 00:53:40,280
first millennium. So if let's say, for the sake of argument,

963
00:53:41,000 --> 00:53:43,360
the Catholic Church, the Roman Catholic Church is the church

964
00:53:43,400 --> 00:53:47,199
of the first thousand years, and if schisms amongst patriarchates

965
00:53:47,199 --> 00:53:50,719
is a disqualifier, then you just disqualified Rome as being

966
00:53:50,760 --> 00:53:53,000
the church of the first thousand years. Nick, do you

967
00:53:53,000 --> 00:53:53,639
have any comments?

968
00:53:54,519 --> 00:53:57,519
Speaker 2: I mean, yeah, I agree to say that disagreement itself

969
00:53:57,599 --> 00:54:00,960
is going to make it, you know, not the true churches.

970
00:54:01,000 --> 00:54:03,400
It doesn't make any sense, right because we believe that

971
00:54:03,760 --> 00:54:06,599
obviously they themselves are not infallible, but the councils themselves

972
00:54:06,599 --> 00:54:09,719
there wouldn't be deemed infallible, So them disagreeing really has

973
00:54:09,760 --> 00:54:12,559
nothing to do with anything. We've had individuals who have

974
00:54:12,599 --> 00:54:14,440
been in certain seats who have been corrupted and have

975
00:54:14,519 --> 00:54:16,639
been bad. It doesn't prove or disprove anything.

976
00:54:16,679 --> 00:54:17,519
Speaker 7: Men are fallible.

977
00:54:18,079 --> 00:54:21,119
Speaker 1: Yeah, I mean, in the Orthodox conception, there's many, many

978
00:54:21,119 --> 00:54:25,719
patriarchis and bishoprics that have gone into schism. And that's

979
00:54:25,719 --> 00:54:30,400
a feature of anybody's church, whether you're Orthodox or Roman Catholic.

980
00:54:30,440 --> 00:54:35,199
So really, a schism occurring amongst patriarchis doesn't disprove or

981
00:54:35,239 --> 00:54:39,400
disprove anything. However, you could argue that the schism of

982
00:54:39,440 --> 00:54:42,079
the Roman papacy and his patriarchy against all the others

983
00:54:42,159 --> 00:54:46,679
seems to indicate maybe that Rome is an error. But Marcos, no,

984
00:54:46,800 --> 00:54:53,679
we did that one. Yeah, let's go to the next call.

985
00:54:54,880 --> 00:55:04,639
Speaker 4: Waffle. Hey there, I was learning.

986
00:55:04,719 --> 00:55:08,440
Speaker 15: If you had any recommendations of books on the Holy Spirit.

987
00:55:11,880 --> 00:55:13,880
Speaker 1: I mean, I would read Losky's works on the Holy

988
00:55:13,920 --> 00:55:19,400
Spirit because uh, Perceptional Holy Spirit that we just referenced

989
00:55:19,440 --> 00:55:22,519
earlier by Vladimir Lovsky. You can get that pdf. That's

990
00:55:22,559 --> 00:55:32,519
a good one for Orthodox theology. Alexander, what's up? What's up? Alexander?

991
00:55:33,559 --> 00:55:33,679
Speaker 4: Hi?

992
00:55:33,800 --> 00:55:38,639
Speaker 16: Ja, Yeah, I have I have two questions for you,

993
00:55:38,719 --> 00:55:39,519
if you don't mind.

994
00:55:41,639 --> 00:55:41,679
Speaker 4: So.

995
00:55:41,840 --> 00:55:42,800
Speaker 9: The first one.

996
00:55:42,599 --> 00:55:44,639
Speaker 4: Is regarding the end times.

997
00:55:44,679 --> 00:55:48,079
Speaker 16: So what do you believe when Jesus comes back and

998
00:55:48,239 --> 00:55:52,920
steps foot on the ground somewhere in Jerusalem.

999
00:55:52,960 --> 00:55:55,599
Speaker 4: What is the order of events that will happen.

1000
00:55:57,079 --> 00:56:00,360
Speaker 1: Again? You could read uh, or you can watch the

1001
00:56:00,719 --> 00:56:04,480
video essays from Jordanville Monastery called Apostsey and Antichrist on

1002
00:56:04,519 --> 00:56:07,360
YouTube for a fuller treatment of this. But I mean,

1003
00:56:07,360 --> 00:56:10,599
we don't believe that he literally has to like fly

1004
00:56:10,719 --> 00:56:12,559
down and stand on the amount of all of this.

1005
00:56:12,559 --> 00:56:14,760
I mean, he may do that, but I mean, really

1006
00:56:14,800 --> 00:56:19,440
just the Orthodox conception is that you have an apostasy, Antichrist,

1007
00:56:19,519 --> 00:56:22,320
persecution the church, and then conversion to the Jews, and

1008
00:56:22,360 --> 00:56:25,480
then the return of Christ and then you have the

1009
00:56:25,519 --> 00:56:28,159
resurrection and Great White Throne judgment. So for us, it's

1010
00:56:28,239 --> 00:56:31,920
pretty it's a pretty clear, simple process. We don't get

1011
00:56:31,760 --> 00:56:34,480
into all this like you know, John Hagey in time

1012
00:56:34,519 --> 00:56:35,480
speculation stuff.

1013
00:56:36,800 --> 00:56:39,719
Speaker 16: Yeah, I noticed, like there is not much details obviously,

1014
00:56:39,719 --> 00:56:42,360
but I was wondering if maybe Orthodoxy provides like more

1015
00:56:42,400 --> 00:56:44,760
in detail, like first this will help and second this third,

1016
00:56:45,000 --> 00:56:46,760
like but I understand.

1017
00:56:46,559 --> 00:56:48,719
Speaker 1: Well, yeah, so I mean I think, like if you

1018
00:56:48,760 --> 00:56:51,159
read this Elders and the Saints, they point out that

1019
00:56:51,280 --> 00:56:53,559
as the Church gets closer to the end of the world,

1020
00:56:54,119 --> 00:56:56,559
the church will have a better sense of the order

1021
00:56:56,559 --> 00:57:00,719
of these events. But you know, as a presently we

1022
00:57:00,760 --> 00:57:03,159
don't fully know the exact order of the events. But

1023
00:57:03,559 --> 00:57:05,199
the closest that you could get, I mean, there are

1024
00:57:05,199 --> 00:57:08,480
some good Orthodox commentaries. My godfather printed a three volume

1025
00:57:08,519 --> 00:57:13,079
commentary on the Apocalypse from James Jordan that he helped edit.

1026
00:57:13,360 --> 00:57:16,519
It's called I just want to just look up a

1027
00:57:16,599 --> 00:57:20,519
Dean Arnold revelation commentary. That's a good one. Days of

1028
00:57:20,559 --> 00:57:29,400
Vengeance by David Chilton's pretty good anyway. Dirp's ten dollars.

1029
00:57:29,440 --> 00:57:32,519
Great work, gentlemen, keep it up. Thank you A are

1030
00:57:32,559 --> 00:57:36,079
you forty crush five dollars? You guys should check out

1031
00:57:36,159 --> 00:57:39,239
Rob Christian. He has many videos and streams against Islam,

1032
00:57:39,360 --> 00:57:43,280
particularly the Muslim academic sources and the dots variants. Are

1033
00:57:43,280 --> 00:57:46,480
you familiar with Rob Christian? I believe he's someone on

1034
00:57:46,519 --> 00:57:55,000
TikTok Yeah, let's see who disagrees. All right, we still

1035
00:57:55,039 --> 00:57:57,480
got twenty people in here. Give me some kind of

1036
00:57:57,519 --> 00:58:02,119
an emoji or something if you disagree. Okay, real wiga disagrees.

1037
00:58:02,199 --> 00:58:06,880
What's up? Got I'm you?

1038
00:58:09,119 --> 00:58:10,599
Speaker 7: I really understand this right now.

1039
00:58:11,119 --> 00:58:12,239
Speaker 9: I'm you, Jay, I'm you?

1040
00:58:13,960 --> 00:58:14,360
Speaker 4: You am you?

1041
00:58:15,320 --> 00:58:16,639
Speaker 1: Okay? What's on your mind?

1042
00:58:18,719 --> 00:58:22,920
Speaker 17: Well, it's kind of a personal matter, and considering you're

1043
00:58:22,960 --> 00:58:27,159
the wisest person that I could ask this question, I'd

1044
00:58:27,159 --> 00:58:28,320
like to hear your thoughts on it.

1045
00:58:28,760 --> 00:58:31,039
Speaker 1: Okay, are you trolling already? Detect something?

1046
00:58:32,280 --> 00:58:33,280
Speaker 9: I'm serious about this.

1047
00:58:33,440 --> 00:58:36,519
Speaker 1: I'm serious a personal matter with me and you or

1048
00:58:36,639 --> 00:58:37,320
me or you?

1049
00:58:37,360 --> 00:58:37,760
Speaker 4: What do you mean?

1050
00:58:37,880 --> 00:58:38,079
Speaker 12: No?

1051
00:58:38,079 --> 00:58:42,119
Speaker 9: No, no, no, My life when it comes to it. You know,

1052
00:58:42,239 --> 00:58:44,280
I have a fork in the road in life, and I.

1053
00:58:44,280 --> 00:58:48,360
Speaker 17: Don't know whether I should you know, uh go where

1054
00:58:48,400 --> 00:58:53,280
my heart is or.

1055
00:58:53,119 --> 00:58:57,519
Speaker 1: Ill your heart rather. I'm just kidding. What's the problem.

1056
00:58:57,559 --> 00:59:01,119
Speaker 9: Well, I'm really into make martial arts. I mean, I've

1057
00:59:01,119 --> 00:59:02,679
been training it since I'm fifteen.

1058
00:59:02,800 --> 00:59:09,119
Speaker 17: And it's as if I have this this hard choice

1059
00:59:09,119 --> 00:59:12,480
to me, why do I go full sanded? And in

1060
00:59:12,519 --> 00:59:16,199
the process I lose my marginally higher intelligence and I

1061
00:59:16,280 --> 00:59:19,840
become retarded because you know, what are the consequences.

1062
00:59:19,159 --> 00:59:22,960
Speaker 9: Of full professional fighter?

1063
00:59:23,079 --> 00:59:26,360
Speaker 1: What's it called a ct C?

1064
00:59:28,199 --> 00:59:31,039
Speaker 17: There is no cure pretty much because the protein towel

1065
00:59:31,360 --> 00:59:31,920
builds up.

1066
00:59:31,880 --> 00:59:35,400
Speaker 9: In your brain after getting hit, Like every.

1067
00:59:34,800 --> 00:59:39,360
Speaker 17: Small hit creates like a mini concussion in your brain,

1068
00:59:39,559 --> 00:59:42,559
which stacks up over time, and it's like really damaging.

1069
00:59:43,440 --> 00:59:47,119
And it's as if I have this fastian bargain, like, hey,

1070
00:59:47,199 --> 00:59:52,000
trade my marginally higher intelligence for something.

1071
00:59:51,719 --> 00:59:52,840
Speaker 4: That I really enjoy doing.

1072
00:59:53,039 --> 00:59:53,719
Speaker 1: How old are you?

1073
00:59:55,320 --> 00:59:56,679
Speaker 4: I'm twenty two, all.

1074
00:59:56,679 --> 01:00:02,239
Speaker 1: Right, I'm gonna tell you this now, being of over

1075
01:00:02,519 --> 01:00:10,199
age seventeen myself, I would in middle age, I would

1076
01:00:10,239 --> 01:00:14,519
not trade my brain for some brawls. In my twenties

1077
01:00:14,519 --> 01:00:16,960
and thirties, so as you get older, I think you're

1078
01:00:16,960 --> 01:00:21,440
gonna want to not have CTE. That would be that

1079
01:00:21,440 --> 01:00:21,960
would be me.

1080
01:00:23,280 --> 01:00:27,119
Speaker 17: Yeah, okay, yeah, Well, the thing is, I'm not looking

1081
01:00:27,159 --> 01:00:29,440
at it from the you know, perspectacle brawler.

1082
01:00:29,559 --> 01:00:32,079
Speaker 9: I'm more of a tactician. You know, I've you know,

1083
01:00:32,280 --> 01:00:33,280
watched all the grades.

1084
01:00:33,320 --> 01:00:36,480
Speaker 17: If you know who I'm talking about, GSP Dimitrius Johnson's

1085
01:00:36,480 --> 01:00:38,400
people who are legit tacticians.

1086
01:00:38,440 --> 01:00:41,320
Speaker 9: They don't go there to you know, brawl lose brain cells.

1087
01:00:41,599 --> 01:00:43,719
Speaker 1: Yeah, but I mean, you know, even still, I just

1088
01:00:43,920 --> 01:00:45,559
I don't know if it be worth it, man, Honestly

1089
01:00:46,360 --> 01:00:47,119
I understand that.

1090
01:00:47,199 --> 01:00:49,039
Speaker 9: Yeah, that's also what I was thinking.

1091
01:00:49,119 --> 01:00:51,719
Speaker 17: I mean, I've lost so many opportunities in the last

1092
01:00:51,719 --> 01:00:54,599
couple of years just because of this dead look in

1093
01:00:54,639 --> 01:00:57,199
my life, Like, hey, should I pursue this or should

1094
01:00:57,199 --> 01:00:59,599
they you know, google down the aviation?

1095
01:01:00,039 --> 01:01:05,000
Speaker 7: Yes, yeah me personally. Me personally, I just wouldn't get hit.

1096
01:01:05,039 --> 01:01:05,639
But like that's just me.

1097
01:01:06,960 --> 01:01:09,639
Speaker 1: Yeah, So just like do it perfectly and never get punched,

1098
01:01:09,679 --> 01:01:15,039
and you're good man. I like Nick Plant, Uh, Anthony

1099
01:01:15,239 --> 01:01:19,360
one dollar, I meant King Philip Spare spread a forged

1100
01:01:19,360 --> 01:01:24,679
bull okay called dayoum Time that claimed a feudal control

1101
01:01:24,719 --> 01:01:31,559
over France to deceive French Catholics against the pope. No

1102
01:01:31,679 --> 01:01:36,920
pope ever used the bull to support the papacy. Please

1103
01:01:37,039 --> 01:01:39,920
learn the full context. Well, what does that have to

1104
01:01:39,960 --> 01:01:43,360
do with unam sanctum and the contradiction in Roman Catholic

1105
01:01:43,360 --> 01:01:46,199
dogma post Vatican two? So you can get snarky with

1106
01:01:46,199 --> 01:01:47,840
me and tell me to learn the full context. But

1107
01:01:47,880 --> 01:01:49,880
your forge bull has nothing to do with my argument,

1108
01:01:49,960 --> 01:01:52,679
So you need to learn the context contemporary compendi him

1109
01:01:52,679 --> 01:01:56,480
since five dollars and says, here's some money, Thank you, Anthony.

1110
01:01:56,519 --> 01:01:58,280
Why don't you call in since you seem to know

1111
01:01:58,320 --> 01:02:03,280
everything about setting us rate on papal history. Uh, do

1112
01:02:03,320 --> 01:02:05,119
you want to address the actual argument or you just

1113
01:02:05,159 --> 01:02:07,199
want to bring up irrelevant papal bulls that have nothing

1114
01:02:07,199 --> 01:02:09,760
to do with when I'm saying them. So please let

1115
01:02:09,760 --> 01:02:11,599
me know, Anthony, I'd like for you to call in,

1116
01:02:11,679 --> 01:02:14,159
And the link is in the show description. Who's in

1117
01:02:14,159 --> 01:02:19,199
the chat and disagrees? Please raise your hand? Here we go, Federalf.

1118
01:02:20,159 --> 01:02:22,599
Where's all these people in the normal streams? And maybe

1119
01:02:22,639 --> 01:02:25,519
Nick brought them all? I guess they want a piece

1120
01:02:25,559 --> 01:02:28,039
of Nick. What's up, man?

1121
01:02:28,760 --> 01:02:37,440
Speaker 13: I'm mute, dude, I wanted to talk about the papacy,

1122
01:02:37,519 --> 01:02:38,239
you know, Jake.

1123
01:02:38,519 --> 01:02:39,280
Speaker 4: Are you up with that?

1124
01:02:40,119 --> 01:02:43,440
Speaker 1: When am I not up to talk about the papacy? Dude?

1125
01:02:43,800 --> 01:02:48,719
Speaker 13: Exactly, Man, That's what I'm saying. So, yeah, man, I

1126
01:02:48,760 --> 01:02:53,440
wanted to talk about it more from the logical point

1127
01:02:53,480 --> 01:02:58,960
of view. You know, as you know any orthodoxy, there

1128
01:02:59,039 --> 01:03:03,840
is like this thing as this three tier model, like

1129
01:03:03,880 --> 01:03:06,519
if you can call it a model, like you have

1130
01:03:06,719 --> 01:03:10,960
the local synods and then you have the regional. Right,

1131
01:03:11,480 --> 01:03:14,639
So in the local you have when you have an

1132
01:03:14,639 --> 01:03:18,119
issue which is on the local level for example, multiple

1133
01:03:18,159 --> 01:03:23,639
priests or clergy and whatnot, you know, and if it

1134
01:03:23,679 --> 01:03:25,559
has to be a result, there is the bishop, right,

1135
01:03:25,559 --> 01:03:31,119
who is the head of this local synate? Then here results, right,

1136
01:03:31,159 --> 01:03:35,800
he is responsible for a resolution. Now when you go

1137
01:03:35,920 --> 01:03:38,360
one level up, on the second level, you have the

1138
01:03:38,400 --> 01:03:39,159
regional level.

1139
01:03:40,239 --> 01:03:43,239
Speaker 1: Yeah, so you're going to argue that the regional should

1140
01:03:43,280 --> 01:03:46,239
be reflected into the universal. This is a Lofton argument

1141
01:03:46,280 --> 01:03:47,480
that he made like five years ago.

1142
01:03:47,519 --> 01:03:50,920
Speaker 13: Is that would your arguing, Yeah, I mean pretty much

1143
01:03:50,960 --> 01:03:53,320
if you would say that it's Loftons.

1144
01:03:53,719 --> 01:03:55,320
Speaker 4: So if this if we follow this.

1145
01:03:55,280 --> 01:03:57,519
Speaker 13: Trail of logic, right, and we go up to the

1146
01:03:57,639 --> 01:04:02,199
universal level, wouldn't you say that there must be a head,

1147
01:04:03,000 --> 01:04:04,880
just as there is a head on the local and

1148
01:04:05,039 --> 01:04:05,760
regional level.

1149
01:04:05,840 --> 01:04:09,360
Speaker 1: Well, what you are missing that is consistently already in

1150
01:04:09,400 --> 01:04:12,159
the New Testament in the Patristic period, is that there

1151
01:04:12,199 --> 01:04:14,000
is a head and his name is Jesus Christ, and

1152
01:04:14,039 --> 01:04:17,199
the purpose of the Holy Spirit is that it's the

1153
01:04:17,199 --> 01:04:21,280
Holy Spirit that is his earthly manifestation of that headship.

1154
01:04:21,480 --> 01:04:23,679
So it's the Roman Catholic position that seems to not

1155
01:04:24,320 --> 01:04:27,599
grasp that the Holy Spirit is who does that function

1156
01:04:27,719 --> 01:04:29,199
in time and space, and they think it has to

1157
01:04:29,199 --> 01:04:32,920
be replaced with a juridical high priest of the Old Testament,

1158
01:04:33,000 --> 01:04:36,280
living person. So you're actually moving retrograde into the Old

1159
01:04:36,280 --> 01:04:38,639
Testament to think that you need to have a living

1160
01:04:38,719 --> 01:04:42,159
high priest to solve the problems. When why wasn't this

1161
01:04:42,320 --> 01:04:45,360
established at Nicea Like why in other words, why don't

1162
01:04:45,400 --> 01:04:48,599
we just move the logic a little further and say, Okay,

1163
01:04:48,679 --> 01:04:51,480
the Bishop of Rome literally just tells every single bishop

1164
01:04:51,480 --> 01:04:53,320
and person in the world what to do in every case,

1165
01:04:53,639 --> 01:04:55,079
and get rid of the synods in general.

1166
01:04:56,679 --> 01:05:00,280
Speaker 13: Yeah, yeah, I'm going to respond to that. The second

1167
01:05:00,320 --> 01:05:02,440
one just going to the first. Of course, you know

1168
01:05:02,599 --> 01:05:06,320
Jesus Christ. He is the ultimate head of the body, right,

1169
01:05:06,360 --> 01:05:08,440
He's the source of everything.

1170
01:05:07,960 --> 01:05:09,519
Speaker 4: Of all unity, of all truth.

1171
01:05:09,599 --> 01:05:13,559
Speaker 13: Yeah, of course, But that doesn't mean that Christ has

1172
01:05:13,599 --> 01:05:15,760
not given us a hierarchy.

1173
01:05:15,400 --> 01:05:19,320
Speaker 4: Right, because if we do this reductionist.

1174
01:05:18,679 --> 01:05:24,119
Speaker 1: Move, this is but you're assuming that you're assuming the

1175
01:05:24,159 --> 01:05:26,480
thing in question though, because I'm asking you so. In

1176
01:05:26,559 --> 01:05:30,159
other words, the logic of where we take this models

1177
01:05:30,199 --> 01:05:33,880
of hierarchy is going to depend on what we think

1178
01:05:34,000 --> 01:05:36,519
Jesus did, what he established. Do you think that he established

1179
01:05:36,519 --> 01:05:40,320
Peter as the sort of arbiter of that? And I'm saying, okay,

1180
01:05:40,440 --> 01:05:43,880
why didn't Peter act that way? And why didn't they

1181
01:05:43,960 --> 01:05:46,760
accept this in the first, second, and third century when

1182
01:05:46,800 --> 01:05:49,199
that should have been the logic of it. Do you

1183
01:05:49,320 --> 01:05:52,000
believe that the papacy was always there from day one,

1184
01:05:52,079 --> 01:05:54,320
as Vatican One says, or do you think it developed?

1185
01:05:56,440 --> 01:05:59,920
Speaker 13: Yeah, so Peter, Yeah, of course in East Antholos, there's

1186
01:06:00,039 --> 01:06:04,000
also belief that Peter was given the keys and he

1187
01:06:04,119 --> 01:06:05,840
is the head, right, He's the point.

1188
01:06:05,639 --> 01:06:06,840
Speaker 4: Of unity of the apostles.

1189
01:06:06,920 --> 01:06:09,320
Speaker 1: Was the Vatican One there in the beginning or did

1190
01:06:09,360 --> 01:06:12,880
it develop? Do you believe the Vatican One deals there

1191
01:06:12,960 --> 01:06:13,599
is or developed.

1192
01:06:13,880 --> 01:06:15,000
Speaker 4: Yeah, I understand.

1193
01:06:15,320 --> 01:06:18,639
Speaker 13: So if we think about the papacy like as a

1194
01:06:18,679 --> 01:06:23,440
dogma of the church, which was a place in Vatican One,

1195
01:06:23,480 --> 01:06:24,639
as a dogma, right, as.

1196
01:06:24,480 --> 01:06:27,719
Speaker 4: An infinitive dogma. Now if we think that this is.

1197
01:06:27,719 --> 01:06:30,440
Speaker 13: A normal dogma, we also have other dogmas too, like,

1198
01:06:30,440 --> 01:06:33,559
for example, the trinity, right or or for example.

1199
01:06:33,199 --> 01:06:35,360
Speaker 1: We have the papacy there at the beginning or did

1200
01:06:35,360 --> 01:06:40,039
it develop Vatican One style? I'm sorry, what for the

1201
01:06:40,079 --> 01:06:43,239
third time? The Vatican One definition of the papacy. Was

1202
01:06:43,239 --> 01:06:45,159
it there in the first, second, third century or did

1203
01:06:45,199 --> 01:06:45,719
it develop?

1204
01:06:47,719 --> 01:06:50,639
Speaker 4: Well, I would say it was better.

1205
01:06:50,800 --> 01:06:54,599
Speaker 13: It was more fully expositive, right, so there is a

1206
01:06:54,639 --> 01:06:58,480
fuller exposition of this doctrine. It's not It's not like

1207
01:06:58,679 --> 01:07:00,400
the way we see for example, if we go to

1208
01:07:00,480 --> 01:07:03,960
pre n icr right, we don't see the exact definition

1209
01:07:04,039 --> 01:07:06,639
of the trinity in like the year one hundred. We

1210
01:07:06,719 --> 01:07:09,280
see a an implicit the view of it, but we

1211
01:07:09,360 --> 01:07:10,519
don't really see.

1212
01:07:10,559 --> 01:07:12,599
Speaker 1: The full So it's doctrinal development.

1213
01:07:15,280 --> 01:07:16,199
Speaker 4: What do you say, was it?

1214
01:07:16,199 --> 01:07:17,519
Speaker 1: So it's doctrinal development?

1215
01:07:19,239 --> 01:07:21,920
Speaker 13: Yeah, I mean with it, I mean if you understand

1216
01:07:21,920 --> 01:07:24,840
by doctrine development that we just developed doctrine out of

1217
01:07:24,880 --> 01:07:25,280
thin air.

1218
01:07:25,400 --> 01:07:26,320
Speaker 4: That's not what it's meant.

1219
01:07:26,880 --> 01:07:28,440
Speaker 1: I know that you don't think that you think it's

1220
01:07:28,559 --> 01:07:30,239
I mean, do you agree with the Newman definition that

1221
01:07:30,280 --> 01:07:32,400
it's a seed that grows into a tree?

1222
01:07:34,440 --> 01:07:34,559
Speaker 18: Uh?

1223
01:07:35,039 --> 01:07:36,360
Speaker 4: Not even that, not even that.

1224
01:07:36,400 --> 01:07:39,440
Speaker 13: It's more of the exposition, like a fuller exposition of it.

1225
01:07:39,639 --> 01:07:43,760
Speaker 1: Just like so basically it was there for all those centuries,

1226
01:07:43,800 --> 01:07:46,679
but the pope didn't use that authority until many centuries later.

1227
01:07:47,159 --> 01:07:49,199
That's the bar route sometimes that he takes.

1228
01:07:50,440 --> 01:07:53,920
Speaker 13: No, it's not that the pope never use it, it's

1229
01:07:54,039 --> 01:07:54,920
it's that.

1230
01:07:55,239 --> 01:07:57,599
Speaker 1: Okay, can you give something Can you give some examples

1231
01:07:57,639 --> 01:08:00,000
of the Vatican One style papacy in the first millennial?

1232
01:08:01,079 --> 01:08:01,760
Speaker 18: Yeah, So, for.

1233
01:08:01,679 --> 01:08:06,679
Speaker 13: Example, the same Pope Leo's claims which he made about Peter,

1234
01:08:06,840 --> 01:08:08,920
about the church many.

1235
01:08:08,679 --> 01:08:13,039
Speaker 1: Scholars, what hold on many scholars. So, but where does

1236
01:08:13,079 --> 01:08:15,440
that teach Vatican One because a lot of those phrases

1237
01:08:15,639 --> 01:08:18,159
can be read in an Orthodox way.

1238
01:08:19,000 --> 01:08:23,039
Speaker 13: Okay, So phrases like, for example, that no pagan faithfulness

1239
01:08:23,399 --> 01:08:26,600
faithlessness will ever overcome this Roman.

1240
01:08:26,319 --> 01:08:30,359
Speaker 1: Seed, and and then the same honorifics that are used

1241
01:08:30,359 --> 01:08:32,079
for the other seas. Do you agree without or no.

1242
01:08:34,640 --> 01:08:40,279
Speaker 4: Okay, So you're talking about Clory language. Now what Flory language?

1243
01:08:40,439 --> 01:08:44,800
Speaker 1: Like honorifics like Alex Thorn just brought up with yasi

1244
01:08:45,079 --> 01:08:48,199
like uh wull be brought up with aborrow.

1245
01:08:50,439 --> 01:08:51,600
Speaker 4: Yeah, I've seen, I've seen.

1246
01:08:52,439 --> 01:08:55,760
Speaker 1: Because how do you know which honorifics applying which ones don't?

1247
01:08:56,760 --> 01:08:59,560
Speaker 4: Okay? So honorifics I see that. You know when you

1248
01:08:59,600 --> 01:09:01,399
apply honorifics? Right? I see?

1249
01:09:01,439 --> 01:09:05,279
Speaker 13: Honorific says when one person says something about another person.

1250
01:09:05,840 --> 01:09:08,079
I don't think the honorific is when you say that

1251
01:09:08,159 --> 01:09:11,720
about yourself. At most it would be arrogance if you

1252
01:09:11,800 --> 01:09:12,600
if you say.

1253
01:09:12,560 --> 01:09:13,960
Speaker 1: Well, how do you know that? They don't? So the

1254
01:09:14,039 --> 01:09:16,119
only honorifics that count are the ones that you say

1255
01:09:16,159 --> 01:09:16,840
about yourself.

1256
01:09:18,000 --> 01:09:20,039
Speaker 13: No, no, I didn't say. I didn't say I said.

1257
01:09:22,560 --> 01:09:24,720
Honorifics are when somebody says.

1258
01:09:24,600 --> 01:09:26,760
Speaker 1: Okay, how do you know that? That's the definition of

1259
01:09:26,800 --> 01:09:29,000
when you do and don't take it? You just invented

1260
01:09:29,039 --> 01:09:31,399
a new definition of all. These are the ones that count.

1261
01:09:31,439 --> 01:09:33,560
It's when someone says it about when you say it

1262
01:09:33,560 --> 01:09:35,640
about yourself, that's when it counts. Because Leo says it's

1263
01:09:35,640 --> 01:09:37,359
about Rome. So that's when it counts.

1264
01:09:38,039 --> 01:09:43,199
Speaker 13: Okay, Yeah, so because because if you speak honorifically for

1265
01:09:43,359 --> 01:09:47,640
your own self, that's arrogance, right, that would be basically arrogance. Right,

1266
01:09:47,840 --> 01:09:50,800
you're just saying something about yourself, which you're actually not.

1267
01:09:51,000 --> 01:09:53,359
So at most you are going to say that Leo

1268
01:09:53,399 --> 01:09:56,119
was being arrogant and he was deceiving himself.

1269
01:09:57,039 --> 01:09:58,760
Speaker 1: No, I don't have a problem. Again. First of all,

1270
01:09:58,800 --> 01:10:01,680
I don't know that you you've yet to show that

1271
01:10:01,720 --> 01:10:04,640
because he uses those terminologies they are equivalent to Vatican one,

1272
01:10:04,720 --> 01:10:06,960
that would you be That would be you retroactively reading

1273
01:10:07,039 --> 01:10:09,920
it back into it, which hasn't been demonstrated yet. And

1274
01:10:09,960 --> 01:10:11,680
that's why you have to go to these honorifics to

1275
01:10:11,720 --> 01:10:13,760
say that. Well, it only counts when it sounds like

1276
01:10:13,840 --> 01:10:16,800
Vatican one, when it's the guy saying about himself. But

1277
01:10:16,840 --> 01:10:18,199
I mean, but again, how do you know that that's

1278
01:10:18,239 --> 01:10:20,840
the case? You're just assuming the thing in question? Why

1279
01:10:20,960 --> 01:10:24,439
is that the fact you made a qualification at criteria

1280
01:10:24,800 --> 01:10:28,319
on the spot to make that count? But how do

1281
01:10:28,359 --> 01:10:30,199
we know that that's? Like, so if the council says

1282
01:10:30,239 --> 01:10:33,439
it about the emperor later on in the seventh Secumentical Council,

1283
01:10:33,439 --> 01:10:34,520
why does that one not count.

1284
01:10:36,439 --> 01:10:38,920
Speaker 13: Okay, yeah, yeah, exactly because he's saying that.

1285
01:10:39,199 --> 01:10:41,079
Speaker 4: I mean, what did he even say to the emperor like.

1286
01:10:41,039 --> 01:10:43,399
Speaker 1: That the emperor the gates of hell will not prevail

1287
01:10:43,439 --> 01:10:47,279
against the Emperor. I'm sorry, what the gates of hell

1288
01:10:47,319 --> 01:10:49,359
will not prevail against the Emperor and the empire?

1289
01:10:50,680 --> 01:10:54,920
Speaker 13: Okay, I mean these.

1290
01:10:53,399 --> 01:10:55,279
Speaker 1: Have all been brought up in the debates. You said,

1291
01:10:55,319 --> 01:10:57,520
you said, you just watched these debates. These have been

1292
01:10:57,520 --> 01:10:58,760
brought up in all those debates.

1293
01:10:58,920 --> 01:11:02,560
Speaker 7: I'm gonna say, this is funny.

1294
01:11:02,920 --> 01:11:05,079
Speaker 1: This is what Alex Soren brought up in the debate,

1295
01:11:05,199 --> 01:11:07,239
and you said you watched it, and then you'll be debate.

1296
01:11:08,479 --> 01:11:11,079
Speaker 13: Okay, yeah, but they haven't tooken notice of like everything

1297
01:11:11,119 --> 01:11:12,439
they said I.

1298
01:11:12,319 --> 01:11:12,880
Speaker 4: Have to rewatch.

1299
01:11:14,680 --> 01:11:17,000
Speaker 1: Yeah, go ahead, I will take note of it.

1300
01:11:17,159 --> 01:11:20,399
Speaker 13: I'm just gonna say that. You know, it's again like

1301
01:11:20,720 --> 01:11:24,079
Flory language. You could say, because someone else is saying that.

1302
01:11:24,479 --> 01:11:26,800
Speaker 1: To the emperor, you made up this criterion, So how

1303
01:11:26,800 --> 01:11:28,239
do you know that the only ones that count are

1304
01:11:28,239 --> 01:11:29,520
when you say it for yourself?

1305
01:11:30,640 --> 01:11:32,520
Speaker 13: How do you know that it would be because it

1306
01:11:32,560 --> 01:11:34,880
would be arrogance and it would just inflatory.

1307
01:11:34,960 --> 01:11:37,840
Speaker 1: So and again, that's your criteria that you've invented at hawk,

1308
01:11:37,920 --> 01:11:40,239
And I'm asking you, is there anywhere in Catholic theology

1309
01:11:40,359 --> 01:11:42,840
or in your magisterial documents that tells you that that's

1310
01:11:42,880 --> 01:11:43,520
the principle?

1311
01:11:44,520 --> 01:11:47,560
Speaker 4: Okay? So yeah, in theology or is.

1312
01:11:47,520 --> 01:11:50,479
Speaker 1: There in anywhere in manisterial documents? Is there a thing

1313
01:11:50,479 --> 01:11:51,680
that tells you that's the criteria?

1314
01:11:53,039 --> 01:11:55,880
Speaker 4: Okay? But it doesn't have to be in every magistrate Is.

1315
01:11:55,840 --> 01:11:59,119
Speaker 1: There any magisterial document that tells you that's the criteria

1316
01:11:59,199 --> 01:11:59,840
when it counts?

1317
01:12:00,920 --> 01:12:01,239
Speaker 4: Okay?

1318
01:12:01,720 --> 01:12:08,359
Speaker 1: I want to say this, Okay, is there No, You're

1319
01:12:08,399 --> 01:12:12,319
not answering. Is there in the magisterium any clear, identifiable

1320
01:12:12,319 --> 01:12:14,239
epistemic criterion or principle for that?

1321
01:12:15,439 --> 01:12:15,720
Speaker 4: Yes?

1322
01:12:15,760 --> 01:12:19,359
Speaker 13: And I am going to say it that in theology,

1323
01:12:19,479 --> 01:12:20,840
right in the Catholic theology and.

1324
01:12:20,800 --> 01:12:23,600
Speaker 1: Even in Okay, where is this? What magisterial document are

1325
01:12:23,600 --> 01:12:24,039
you signing?

1326
01:12:25,680 --> 01:12:29,039
Speaker 4: Well, I'm citing the fullness of the faith.

1327
01:12:29,600 --> 01:12:32,199
Speaker 1: So the fullness of the faith is the magisterial document?

1328
01:12:32,359 --> 01:12:34,640
Which one is this? Where's the fullness of faith? Document?

1329
01:12:35,079 --> 01:12:35,680
Can I read that?

1330
01:12:36,199 --> 01:12:38,319
Speaker 4: Okay? No, it's not a single document.

1331
01:12:38,479 --> 01:12:42,680
Speaker 1: Okay, So name one name a document, name any documents,

1332
01:12:42,880 --> 01:12:43,800
Name any document?

1333
01:12:46,039 --> 01:12:48,239
Speaker 4: Okay? Can I just make no just make this point.

1334
01:12:49,359 --> 01:12:53,159
Speaker 1: We're donewhere, go ahead.

1335
01:12:53,239 --> 01:12:55,359
Speaker 2: And it's funny because if you watch the Alex debate,

1336
01:12:55,399 --> 01:12:58,520
you'll see the Alex he literally like predicted what he'd

1337
01:12:58,560 --> 01:13:00,159
say too if you actually watch him. He said, I

1338
01:13:00,199 --> 01:13:02,319
know he's going to bring up honorific so he so

1339
01:13:02,399 --> 01:13:04,479
he actually watched the debate. That was one of the

1340
01:13:04,479 --> 01:13:05,279
first main.

1341
01:13:05,159 --> 01:13:11,079
Speaker 1: Parts exactly, uh and uh. He went through multiple honorifics.

1342
01:13:11,079 --> 01:13:13,520
And by the way, there's more honorifics than than Alex

1343
01:13:13,560 --> 01:13:18,479
even mentioned. For example, Basil's uh uh many many honorifics

1344
01:13:18,479 --> 01:13:22,000
in the in his letters that I pointed out in

1345
01:13:22,000 --> 01:13:24,920
a podcast five years ago where he talks about the

1346
01:13:24,960 --> 01:13:27,039
Church of Antioch being the head of the entire body,

1347
01:13:27,199 --> 01:13:29,119
all the graces flow from the head to the rest

1348
01:13:29,119 --> 01:13:31,000
of the church, blah blah blah, and he says Rome

1349
01:13:31,159 --> 01:13:34,760
was worthless in the Malitian schism. Now, if I bring

1350
01:13:34,800 --> 01:13:36,920
that to Roman Catholic none of that counts. None of

1351
01:13:36,920 --> 01:13:43,840
that counts. FDA. Did you want to say something about this, Yeah, it's.

1352
01:13:43,680 --> 01:13:46,840
Speaker 4: A point that I made before.

1353
01:13:48,439 --> 01:13:50,079
Speaker 1: With Pope Leo for example.

1354
01:13:50,239 --> 01:13:58,439
Speaker 19: So the council calsnom except something from Pope Leo.

1355
01:13:59,119 --> 01:14:03,640
Speaker 4: What did the Roman Catholic say, oh, you see, he has.

1356
01:14:03,680 --> 01:14:08,039
Speaker 19: A supreme authority over councils, and if the council doesn't.

1357
01:14:07,720 --> 01:14:11,319
Speaker 4: Accept or is called outside of Rome, they say, well

1358
01:14:11,319 --> 01:14:16,000
it's not a legitimate council. That's obviously the.

1359
01:14:15,960 --> 01:14:18,399
Speaker 1: Most But I think, you know it's funny because he

1360
01:14:18,439 --> 01:14:20,439
came on saying, you wanted to talk about the epistemic

1361
01:14:20,520 --> 01:14:23,199
logical issue, and the problem was that as we dig

1362
01:14:23,239 --> 01:14:26,680
into the weeds, it turns out actually it's just the

1363
01:14:26,760 --> 01:14:29,399
Roman Catholic position that is the logical position. Okay, but

1364
01:14:29,439 --> 01:14:32,279
we're asking you, where in your system do you get

1365
01:14:32,319 --> 01:14:35,079
the epistemic principle? And he says, well, does the system

1366
01:14:35,119 --> 01:14:38,359
tells you the principle? By the system? Okay, where what's

1367
01:14:38,399 --> 01:14:41,239
the magisterial document that tells me? That's clearly because remember

1368
01:14:41,720 --> 01:14:45,600
they have a system that's rounded on magisterium and that's

1369
01:14:45,640 --> 01:14:48,920
a fixed set body of propositions and doctrines. Now it

1370
01:14:48,960 --> 01:14:52,720
is debatable what makes that up, but that Roman Catholicism

1371
01:14:52,880 --> 01:14:56,119
is based on magisterial statements and documents isn't in debate.

1372
01:14:56,239 --> 01:14:59,319
So we know that's their principle, that's their epistemic go

1373
01:14:59,359 --> 01:15:02,359
to thing. And when we actually asked, remember the Trent

1374
01:15:02,359 --> 01:15:05,359
Horn thing. When I asked Trent this, and Trent finally

1375
01:15:05,399 --> 01:15:07,399
in a video, tried to address it. He said, oh,

1376
01:15:07,520 --> 01:15:11,479
canon law, which is fallible by the way, in their view,

1377
01:15:11,840 --> 01:15:15,800
canon law tells us that it's magisterial and binding when

1378
01:15:15,840 --> 01:15:21,520
it's manifest that it is so. So in other words,

1379
01:15:21,520 --> 01:15:24,800
a circle exactly the thing in question is the thing

1380
01:15:24,800 --> 01:15:27,319
in question or the thing in question is answered by

1381
01:15:27,840 --> 01:15:32,399
just restating what's in question. Skate monkey, how do you

1382
01:15:32,399 --> 01:15:35,239
know where I find good material on I don't well.

1383
01:15:35,319 --> 01:15:38,640
I mean you could look at you know, RFK stuff

1384
01:15:39,239 --> 01:15:42,479
that was that's probably a lot more acceptable to a

1385
01:15:42,520 --> 01:15:44,560
lot of people then, you know. But I have a

1386
01:15:44,600 --> 01:15:51,520
talk on Jonas Salk's book Survival of the Wisest, So

1387
01:15:51,600 --> 01:15:54,479
that's that's what convinced me. I just read his own book.

1388
01:15:58,199 --> 01:16:01,359
But Nick, do you have any other comments on Roman

1389
01:16:01,359 --> 01:16:05,279
Catholic papal magisterial claims.

1390
01:16:05,880 --> 01:16:07,399
Speaker 7: I mean, I just think that the point is that

1391
01:16:07,479 --> 01:16:08,159
it's arbitrary.

1392
01:16:08,279 --> 01:16:10,800
Speaker 2: Most of these things are arbitrary, Like when you ask

1393
01:16:10,880 --> 01:16:13,159
them for the claims and the first millennium, I mean,

1394
01:16:13,199 --> 01:16:15,159
we just we don't see them there when you ask

1395
01:16:15,199 --> 01:16:18,520
them for the justification that you find like like Alex

1396
01:16:18,560 --> 01:16:20,439
did in the Bay. You know, what's justification for how

1397
01:16:20,479 --> 01:16:23,560
we know whether or not he's speaking infallibly in the

1398
01:16:23,560 --> 01:16:24,239
first millennial.

1399
01:16:24,359 --> 01:16:25,560
Speaker 7: We don't find that anywhere.

1400
01:16:25,560 --> 01:16:27,800
Speaker 2: We don't find any sort of criteria there, We don't

1401
01:16:27,840 --> 01:16:31,439
find anybody speaking about any criteria. So it's all kind

1402
01:16:31,439 --> 01:16:34,920
of arbitrary, and it's like looking at things from a

1403
01:16:35,000 --> 01:16:37,319
view of a lens of the future.

1404
01:16:37,359 --> 01:16:40,680
Speaker 7: It's like kind of like a oh, what's it called.

1405
01:16:40,800 --> 01:16:44,079
It's like presentism basically.

1406
01:16:43,840 --> 01:16:46,439
Speaker 1: Yeah, anachronism where you read back into the history of

1407
01:16:46,439 --> 01:16:47,199
the present. Yeah.

1408
01:16:47,239 --> 01:16:49,880
Speaker 19: Oh, you know, I thought about this. So it's it's

1409
01:16:49,920 --> 01:16:55,119
similar to certain Protestant heresies. Right, So that's exactly what

1410
01:16:55,319 --> 01:17:00,399
Roman Catholic system is. Don't you think it would have

1411
01:17:00,439 --> 01:17:04,079
been that important that it was spelled out in details?

1412
01:17:05,000 --> 01:17:06,680
Speaker 1: Yeah? Well, I mean, why why why do we need

1413
01:17:06,720 --> 01:17:11,199
eighteen We've got to wait sixteen years before we get

1414
01:17:11,680 --> 01:17:12,359
Then we'll.

1415
01:17:13,239 --> 01:17:16,800
Speaker 4: We'll get our magic glasses from Vaticum.

1416
01:17:16,279 --> 01:17:20,479
Speaker 19: One that we dug up, and then we'll be able

1417
01:17:20,520 --> 01:17:23,239
to see We'll just look at it.

1418
01:17:23,199 --> 01:17:26,600
Speaker 4: It's like if that is exactly what the church is like.

1419
01:17:27,119 --> 01:17:29,640
Speaker 3: So you have to quote mine and go through all

1420
01:17:29,720 --> 01:17:33,000
this stuff use a Vatican.

1421
01:17:32,640 --> 01:17:35,800
Speaker 19: One principle that doesn't come up eighteen hundred years later.

1422
01:17:36,880 --> 01:17:43,960
Nine And that's your position. I mean, think about that.

1423
01:17:44,000 --> 01:17:48,239
It's exactly, you know the same as dispensations or any

1424
01:17:48,319 --> 01:17:49,199
Protestant heresy.

1425
01:17:49,319 --> 01:17:51,840
Speaker 4: Is that, well we had just have to wait eighteen

1426
01:17:51,920 --> 01:17:52,439
hundred years.

1427
01:17:52,479 --> 01:17:54,960
Speaker 1: Well, they're just like, it's just like James White trying

1428
01:17:54,960 --> 01:17:58,159
to say no, Actually, the Church Fathers the justification by

1429
01:17:58,199 --> 01:18:01,119
faith alone, and let me find you a few quotes

1430
01:18:01,159 --> 01:18:03,960
where it says just we're saved by faith, we're saved

1431
01:18:03,960 --> 01:18:06,399
by grace. See that's the Protestant doctrine. So they do

1432
01:18:06,479 --> 01:18:08,720
the same thing. It's like James White reading the Church

1433
01:18:08,760 --> 01:18:11,319
Fathers where it's like, let me craft out of the

1434
01:18:11,359 --> 01:18:13,840
Church Fathers with a bunch of you know, copy paste,

1435
01:18:14,840 --> 01:18:17,680
you know, phrases out of context, and then I'll ignore

1436
01:18:17,720 --> 01:18:19,840
all the country evidence. That's the whole that's the whole thing.

1437
01:18:19,880 --> 01:18:22,600
And by the way, why don't the Church Fathers in

1438
01:18:22,640 --> 01:18:25,840
the first thousand years argue like today as modern Roman

1439
01:18:25,840 --> 01:18:29,359
calolquy papist apologists. Have you ever noticed that they don't

1440
01:18:29,439 --> 01:18:31,920
argue at all like them, like they're spent, they're spending

1441
01:18:31,920 --> 01:18:36,279
all their time arguing Christology transterarrent theology. Why aren't they

1442
01:18:36,319 --> 01:18:39,680
just doing papal apologetics in the first thousand years? Oh, well,

1443
01:18:39,720 --> 01:18:42,640
because it developed and it wasn't explicated very clearly. Well, then,

1444
01:18:42,640 --> 01:18:45,720
why wasn't it explicated right away? Wouldn't it have been

1445
01:18:45,760 --> 01:18:48,479
in Rome's interest if they had all this prerogative empower

1446
01:18:48,680 --> 01:18:53,760
to immediately magisterially state what the doctrine of the church was.

1447
01:18:53,920 --> 01:18:58,840
Why isn't this in the creed? By the way? Okay, So, Lachlan,

1448
01:18:58,920 --> 01:19:01,399
what's up? Hey, Jay?

1449
01:19:03,039 --> 01:19:06,479
Speaker 18: I've I'm sort of pushing back from a Roman Catholic

1450
01:19:06,600 --> 01:19:09,960
sort of point of view. I converted to the Church

1451
01:19:10,439 --> 01:19:14,840
probably around three months ago from a Protestant Anglican background.

1452
01:19:16,600 --> 01:19:19,199
Speaker 4: I sort of sort of been pushing through the Church.

1453
01:19:19,000 --> 01:19:22,359
Speaker 18: Fathers for the last year and for the last three

1454
01:19:22,399 --> 01:19:24,000
months has sort of been starting to get into the

1455
01:19:24,000 --> 01:19:27,039
Greek Fathers at the moment, and just started reading through

1456
01:19:27,560 --> 01:19:31,279
Maximus the confess there and his sort of logoy doctrine

1457
01:19:31,399 --> 01:19:34,359
good and it was sort of his logo, a doctrine

1458
01:19:34,359 --> 01:19:37,159
that sort of realized made me sort of configured as

1459
01:19:37,199 --> 01:19:41,119
an Anglican that my sort of view of reformed Sacraments

1460
01:19:41,159 --> 01:19:44,159
didn't really line up with sort of in Hypostasis and

1461
01:19:44,199 --> 01:19:48,079
the Calcedonian Fathers, and it sort of collapses really Christology

1462
01:19:48,119 --> 01:19:50,520
in a sense and sort of isolates it.

1463
01:19:51,920 --> 01:19:56,279
Speaker 1: Well, I mean, yeah, and let me enter that real

1464
01:19:56,319 --> 01:19:59,039
quick here, because I had a similar track right where

1465
01:19:59,079 --> 01:20:01,760
I sort of was was Catholic of tradcat and sort

1466
01:20:01,800 --> 01:20:05,520
of reading Maximus and Cavedotionans, and that's when I started

1467
01:20:05,600 --> 01:20:09,479
encountering a lot of this stuff that just isn't romancallic theology.

1468
01:20:09,520 --> 01:20:12,039
Like Maximus says, the energies are the things around God,

1469
01:20:12,560 --> 01:20:15,279
So I mean, are you how are you gonna? I mean,

1470
01:20:15,399 --> 01:20:17,640
especially when it comes to Christology, right, he makes the

1471
01:20:17,760 --> 01:20:22,439
energies essential to his Christological doctrine to refute the mono

1472
01:20:22,439 --> 01:20:25,960
Thelites and the model energiest So I mean, is that

1473
01:20:26,039 --> 01:20:27,279
not the essence energy distinction?

1474
01:20:29,159 --> 01:20:31,760
Speaker 18: Yeah, So that's where I'd like to go with this

1475
01:20:31,840 --> 01:20:33,520
as well, because I've.

1476
01:20:33,359 --> 01:20:35,640
Speaker 4: Sort of I haven't really.

1477
01:20:35,399 --> 01:20:37,439
Speaker 18: Done a lot of polem my theology from being honest,

1478
01:20:37,439 --> 01:20:39,079
so I can't really push.

1479
01:20:38,920 --> 01:20:39,600
Speaker 4: Back too much.

1480
01:20:39,640 --> 01:20:41,439
Speaker 18: But from what I was sort of from what I

1481
01:20:41,560 --> 01:20:45,960
understand is from what I give from Maximus is he

1482
01:20:46,079 --> 01:20:49,159
sort of keeps all things in the LOGOFS. So it's

1483
01:20:49,159 --> 01:20:51,680
like even the logoi doctrine is sort of a precision

1484
01:20:51,800 --> 01:20:53,039
inside the one LOGOFS.

1485
01:20:53,079 --> 01:20:54,680
Speaker 4: The mean he is the one and the one, the

1486
01:20:54,760 --> 01:20:55,199
meaning you.

1487
01:20:55,199 --> 01:20:58,439
Speaker 1: Know, well, the procession of the procession of the energies

1488
01:20:58,479 --> 01:21:02,560
and the logi are also energy is through the logos,

1489
01:21:02,600 --> 01:21:05,520
but there's no in the logos procession because all of

1490
01:21:05,520 --> 01:21:08,520
the energies, as Basil says, have a triadic movement. They

1491
01:21:08,600 --> 01:21:10,720
move from the Father through the Son and the Spirit.

1492
01:21:10,840 --> 01:21:13,920
So everything in the trinity is triadic. And as you

1493
01:21:14,119 --> 01:21:15,760
if you're I don't know if you're reading the ambiguita,

1494
01:21:15,880 --> 01:21:20,079
but if you progress through the Ambigua, you're gonna notice

1495
01:21:20,079 --> 01:21:21,640
that he doesn't. He talks about the energies and the

1496
01:21:21,680 --> 01:21:24,520
operations all the time, and he explicitly says they're not

1497
01:21:24,600 --> 01:21:26,680
the essence. So, I mean, Maximus teaches the us and

1498
01:21:26,720 --> 01:21:30,840
scenergiesstinction explicitly, not just in that but more so in Christology,

1499
01:21:30,880 --> 01:21:33,239
because he says, in Christ there's two wills into energies

1500
01:21:33,239 --> 01:21:37,079
and the energies deified the human nature. That is impossible

1501
01:21:37,239 --> 01:21:42,079
with the Roman Catholic doctrine that grace or the divine

1502
01:21:42,159 --> 01:21:45,000
energies in us or in the human nature of Christ

1503
01:21:45,119 --> 01:21:47,239
are a supernatural created reality.

1504
01:21:47,920 --> 01:21:51,359
Speaker 2: Yeah, it's specifically in business, and Pat speaks about that

1505
01:21:51,439 --> 01:21:51,720
a lot.

1506
01:21:52,880 --> 01:21:55,960
Speaker 18: See I would say, because so that the logos of

1507
01:21:56,319 --> 01:21:59,600
Natsch I mean, you know, sort of in hypostasis, and

1508
01:21:59,600 --> 01:22:02,800
everybody has a logos of your own nature, and so

1509
01:22:02,920 --> 01:22:05,840
in a scene, the logos of your own nature is

1510
01:22:06,000 --> 01:22:08,520
created because it's not it's inseparable from you.

1511
01:22:08,680 --> 01:22:12,760
Speaker 20: So in a scene that has created grace, no, that's

1512
01:22:12,800 --> 01:22:16,840
not right, No, Maximus city, No, you don't understand or

1513
01:22:17,279 --> 01:22:20,840
misunderstanding the logi doctrine. So the logi are the divine ideas,

1514
01:22:20,880 --> 01:22:26,600
they're uncreated divine thought wills, and the created order is

1515
01:22:26,720 --> 01:22:29,720
created based on the pattern of those. So for example,

1516
01:22:29,760 --> 01:22:33,720
your created nature is a created nature that's not grace.

1517
01:22:34,399 --> 01:22:37,600
Grace is the uncreated energy of God that deifies you.

1518
01:22:37,640 --> 01:22:40,119
In fact, there's a specific statement in Ambiguity that I've

1519
01:22:40,159 --> 01:22:44,199
cited in multiple places where Maximus says, the same energy

1520
01:22:44,279 --> 01:22:48,079
that God has is the energy that deifies the saints.

1521
01:22:48,399 --> 01:22:51,319
So unless you think God has created energies, which would

1522
01:22:51,359 --> 01:22:54,760
be the Tim Gordon domestic position, which is idolatry, no

1523
01:22:54,840 --> 01:22:56,560
it's the same energy that God has.

1524
01:22:56,439 --> 01:22:58,720
Speaker 1: That defies us. That's why Jesus says that we partake

1525
01:22:58,800 --> 01:23:02,399
of his uh glory that he had with the Father

1526
01:23:02,960 --> 01:23:05,159
before the foundation of the world in John seventeen. God's

1527
01:23:05,159 --> 01:23:08,000
glory is not a creature. So Maximus is very explicit

1528
01:23:08,039 --> 01:23:10,359
as you and I've read him extensively, at least a

1529
01:23:10,359 --> 01:23:12,600
few thousand pages of Saint Maximus. You're gonna notice that

1530
01:23:12,640 --> 01:23:16,720
he consistently says the energies are uncreated grace. That's not

1531
01:23:16,800 --> 01:23:19,960
the same thing as the logie of you, which is

1532
01:23:20,000 --> 01:23:23,039
a divine idea and pattern of you. But your nature

1533
01:23:23,720 --> 01:23:25,960
is created. It's not a divine grace.

1534
01:23:28,560 --> 01:23:32,199
Speaker 18: Yes, but our natures are sort of in hypostaces of

1535
01:23:32,279 --> 01:23:35,359
these divine ideas, and in.

1536
01:23:35,359 --> 01:23:40,439
Speaker 1: Hypostats you're missing. You're missing, and you're misunderstanding. The terminology

1537
01:23:40,479 --> 01:23:43,640
in hypostasis refers to the mode of the nature that

1538
01:23:43,680 --> 01:23:47,520
you have. The logi are not hyposthetized. The logi are

1539
01:23:47,560 --> 01:23:52,039
divine energies. What's in hypostatized is the nature in the

1540
01:23:52,079 --> 01:23:53,680
person Bob, in the person J.

1541
01:23:55,119 --> 01:23:55,760
Speaker 4: Yes, but I.

1542
01:23:55,720 --> 01:24:00,439
Speaker 18: Think because my nature is in hyposthicized, because of the logoi,

1543
01:24:00,800 --> 01:24:05,000
there is a in this sort of an insuperableness to

1544
01:24:05,239 --> 01:24:08,840
the logoi that there is no there's no complicate, you know,

1545
01:24:08,880 --> 01:24:11,880
there's no complication between my logoy and my nature.

1546
01:24:11,920 --> 01:24:13,319
Speaker 4: That is in hypostosised.

1547
01:24:13,520 --> 01:24:15,560
Speaker 1: Yeah, again, you're you're not understanding you.

1548
01:24:15,520 --> 01:24:16,840
Speaker 4: Think incarnational logic.

1549
01:24:16,920 --> 01:24:19,319
Speaker 1: It's it seems to be that you don't understand these

1550
01:24:19,640 --> 01:24:23,159
you're confusing the terms. So the things are related, but

1551
01:24:23,359 --> 01:24:26,520
you're collapsing them. So the logi is the plan and

1552
01:24:26,680 --> 01:24:29,520
process that that God has for you in his divine mind.

1553
01:24:29,880 --> 01:24:34,880
That includes your birth, it includes your process and maturation

1554
01:24:35,039 --> 01:24:40,520
and floration, floor and flourishing and your eschatological uh in goal.

1555
01:24:40,680 --> 01:24:43,960
That's the logi, the plan, the architecture that God has

1556
01:24:44,000 --> 01:24:47,319
for you. It is not identical to your nature. The

1557
01:24:47,359 --> 01:24:50,479
logi is an uncreated divine thought. It's a divine idea.

1558
01:24:51,079 --> 01:24:53,880
And God creates you on the basis of the eternal

1559
01:24:53,920 --> 01:24:57,359
predetermination or plan that He has of you. But you

1560
01:24:57,399 --> 01:25:00,359
grow and progress and mature either in a cour with

1561
01:25:00,399 --> 01:25:03,880
that logi or against that logi, which is your your downfall.

1562
01:25:04,399 --> 01:25:08,760
So that's what is the architecture or the structure of reality.

1563
01:25:08,840 --> 01:25:12,039
It is not reality itself. There's a distinction between for example,

1564
01:25:12,600 --> 01:25:15,600
in God's mind there's an uncreated number seven that he

1565
01:25:15,640 --> 01:25:19,159
has an idea of, but the number seven is a

1566
01:25:19,279 --> 01:25:22,720
created reality that that's based on. Another way to show

1567
01:25:22,760 --> 01:25:27,079
this is Maximus's doctrine of universals. Universals are not logi.

1568
01:25:27,600 --> 01:25:31,239
Universals are patterned on the logie of the universal. So

1569
01:25:31,279 --> 01:25:35,279
there's a universal concept that is in the operant in

1570
01:25:35,319 --> 01:25:39,359
the created order. But according to Maximus, universals can perish,

1571
01:25:39,560 --> 01:25:42,640
they can go away. So that shows us that natures

1572
01:25:42,680 --> 01:25:44,760
and universals are not logi.

1573
01:25:47,239 --> 01:25:50,359
Speaker 18: Okay, I think I argue where you're coming from. I

1574
01:25:50,439 --> 01:25:52,760
just think maybe I was getting caught up. Is based

1575
01:25:52,800 --> 01:25:56,800
on the idea that sort of, I mean, the logoy

1576
01:25:57,119 --> 01:26:00,119
sort of we're always sort of placing it was, well,

1577
01:26:00,680 --> 01:26:04,039
they in hyperstaicize each instance of our nature, and we

1578
01:26:04,119 --> 01:26:07,039
are sustained in a sense by the divine ideas by

1579
01:26:07,319 --> 01:26:09,079
well how they relate to the one will of God.

1580
01:26:09,520 --> 01:26:10,840
Speaker 4: So in a sense, the.

1581
01:26:10,760 --> 01:26:14,680
Speaker 18: Logoy sort of their sort of relation to us is

1582
01:26:14,840 --> 01:26:17,399
the constant will of being. I suppose, so there is

1583
01:26:17,800 --> 01:26:20,319
we are tied up to it in a sense.

1584
01:26:20,359 --> 01:26:23,359
Speaker 1: I think we are. I mean, I mean you exist.

1585
01:26:23,680 --> 01:26:27,199
Speaker 18: His statement for the logos of God, who is always,

1586
01:26:27,239 --> 01:26:30,680
God will always and in all things actualized. The mystery

1587
01:26:30,720 --> 01:26:34,000
of his embodiment and sort of seeing these logo is

1588
01:26:34,079 --> 01:26:36,520
insuperable from creation.

1589
01:26:37,920 --> 01:26:41,239
Speaker 1: That's not true. That's not true. That's why they're called

1590
01:26:41,319 --> 01:26:44,359
thought wills. Don't you think God has in his mind?

1591
01:26:45,479 --> 01:26:47,680
God has omniscience and knowledge of the world, the worlds

1592
01:26:47,720 --> 01:26:52,439
that you didn't create, right, Yeah, So there are logie

1593
01:26:52,760 --> 01:26:55,880
of which they were not actualized because God has knowledge

1594
01:26:55,880 --> 01:26:57,880
of a world where there's no Aquinas, so there's no

1595
01:26:58,119 --> 01:27:01,800
you know, there's no beatles. Okay, but God didn't create

1596
01:27:01,840 --> 01:27:06,399
those worlds. So not every divine idea has it's created

1597
01:27:06,479 --> 01:27:09,399
analog and that's why Maximus and other church fathers will

1598
01:27:09,399 --> 01:27:14,039
call them thought wills, and because only certain logi were

1599
01:27:14,079 --> 01:27:17,239
actualized in the created order, namely the ones that he

1600
01:27:17,319 --> 01:27:20,039
created on the basis of But God is omniscient, and

1601
01:27:20,119 --> 01:27:24,560
as Basil says, God has infinite energies, not just many infinite.

1602
01:27:25,000 --> 01:27:27,279
So the thoughts of God, by the way, which are

1603
01:27:27,319 --> 01:27:30,640
the divine logi, Besils says, the thoughts of God are

1604
01:27:30,640 --> 01:27:34,600
also infinite, So there's infinite logi. But he didn't create

1605
01:27:34,760 --> 01:27:38,119
infinite worlds. He created this specific world, which is why

1606
01:27:38,159 --> 01:27:43,079
it's tied not to Platonic ideas of conceptualism, but that

1607
01:27:43,800 --> 01:27:48,920
he says, the Logi that he willed are you're correct

1608
01:27:48,960 --> 01:27:52,279
to say in hyposthetized in the logos, meaning that the

1609
01:27:52,359 --> 01:27:56,359
logos is the one that determined, because its creation happens

1610
01:27:56,359 --> 01:27:59,840
through him, which would be created and which would not?

1611
01:28:01,119 --> 01:28:03,000
I mean the Father and the Son and the Spirit

1612
01:28:03,039 --> 01:28:05,760
all decided it wasn't the Son and not the Father.

1613
01:28:05,840 --> 01:28:09,159
But when he talks about the nhipod that the logi

1614
01:28:09,239 --> 01:28:11,920
or nipostetized, he means that they're also personal. And this

1615
01:28:12,000 --> 01:28:14,439
is too if you read Tolosen's dissertation on the Logi,

1616
01:28:14,479 --> 01:28:17,279
he says this is what Maximus is doing to combat

1617
01:28:17,960 --> 01:28:22,399
Platonic impersonalism, because Plato thinks that the divine ideas are

1618
01:28:22,439 --> 01:28:26,239
really the determiners of what it emanates from the monad,

1619
01:28:26,600 --> 01:28:30,199
and Maximus wants to distance the created order and the

1620
01:28:30,239 --> 01:28:34,079
divine ideas from Platonism by saying, no, they're not immaterial,

1621
01:28:34,800 --> 01:28:40,920
or that they're not ideas that are determinative causes. They

1622
01:28:40,960 --> 01:28:46,119
are ideas that the Son wills to create, and hence

1623
01:28:46,159 --> 01:28:49,119
thought wills for the created order, and that makes it

1624
01:28:49,199 --> 01:28:51,800
not platonic. So there's a very important distinction. If you

1625
01:28:51,840 --> 01:28:53,760
read the Tolis and dissertation on this, this the whole

1626
01:28:53,800 --> 01:28:56,960
book is about that. This is why it's not platonism

1627
01:28:57,119 --> 01:29:01,319
or platonic divine conceptualism.

1628
01:29:01,399 --> 01:29:03,079
Speaker 4: Yeah, well, thanks to Jack.

1629
01:29:03,760 --> 01:29:05,560
Speaker 1: Yeah, keep reading though you're on the right track. Also

1630
01:29:05,600 --> 01:29:07,880
read free Choice in Saint Maximus. That will help. I

1631
01:29:07,880 --> 01:29:10,239
think sort of lay this out. Oh, I didn't mean

1632
01:29:10,279 --> 01:29:13,319
to FDI. I didn't mean to remove you, so excuse me.

1633
01:29:13,319 --> 01:29:21,039
I'm sorry for that hit the wrong person. Okay, who disagrees.

1634
01:29:21,039 --> 01:29:22,640
We're probably going to try to wrap it up pretty

1635
01:29:22,680 --> 01:29:24,640
soon here because we've been going for three and a

1636
01:29:24,680 --> 01:29:28,039
half hours. Guys, thank you so much. Nick is available

1637
01:29:28,119 --> 01:29:33,159
on YouTube and TikTok. He is fearless truth. Josh says,

1638
01:29:33,159 --> 01:29:35,479
for five dollars, do a debate with Wagner on essence

1639
01:29:35,520 --> 01:29:38,439
INERGI distinction. I've asked him twice to debate different topics,

1640
01:29:38,439 --> 01:29:41,279
and the last two times i've asked, Wagner explicitly says

1641
01:29:41,319 --> 01:29:43,479
I am not a debater and I'm not doing debates.

1642
01:29:43,479 --> 01:29:45,800
He says, if you disagree, replied to the videos. So

1643
01:29:46,199 --> 01:29:49,000
Wagner has disagreed twice the last time. Two times I've

1644
01:29:49,000 --> 01:29:51,039
asked to debate, I think, I mean, I don't remember

1645
01:29:51,319 --> 01:29:55,159
mentioning energies. I think I'm asked him to debate tomism

1646
01:29:55,159 --> 01:29:57,159
and epistemology and he said no. And then I said

1647
01:29:57,159 --> 01:30:02,039
what about papacy and he said no. So Wagner does, officially,

1648
01:30:02,479 --> 01:30:04,920
in two replies in the last year, does not want

1649
01:30:04,960 --> 01:30:08,920
to do a formal debate. Skate monkey, I know we

1650
01:30:08,960 --> 01:30:18,720
did that one. Uh the rad God five bucks. Papists

1651
01:30:19,159 --> 01:30:22,680
are actually Mohammedan's and they're in terms of a target argumentation,

1652
01:30:22,680 --> 01:30:25,279
I would say nowadays they pretty much argue an act

1653
01:30:25,359 --> 01:30:29,640
like Muslim John Vatican two doctrine makes complete sense for

1654
01:30:29,760 --> 01:30:33,640
their religion. Maybe actually Muslims and Catholics worship the same God.

1655
01:30:34,199 --> 01:30:36,079
Well yeh they yeah, they kind of act the same.

1656
01:30:36,560 --> 01:30:42,159
Uh Aka, Yesua five dollars Jay, would you debate deconstruction zone.

1657
01:30:42,199 --> 01:30:45,800
He's an atheist and he's convincing people to become atheists.

1658
01:30:45,840 --> 01:30:48,479
He teaches the God of the Bible is false. I

1659
01:30:48,479 --> 01:30:51,760
mean he could call in uh if they want to

1660
01:30:51,800 --> 01:30:54,359
have a conversation. Is he a TikTok read it?

1661
01:30:54,800 --> 01:30:57,439
Speaker 2: I mean he went on a one time with inspiring

1662
01:30:57,439 --> 01:30:59,640
philosophy on the Big Debate and his bying philosophy the

1663
01:30:59,720 --> 01:31:01,279
show like you're.

1664
01:31:00,880 --> 01:31:03,079
Speaker 1: A TikTok so, it's load tier.

1665
01:31:04,680 --> 01:31:06,560
Speaker 7: God is God is bad type stuff.

1666
01:31:07,680 --> 01:31:10,640
Speaker 1: Alex Orthodox shout out to Alex soaring five dollars. Nick

1667
01:31:10,760 --> 01:31:14,720
sells Coca Cola better than Kendall Jenner sells Pepsi blessings.

1668
01:31:16,359 --> 01:31:19,439
Speaker 7: They need to sponsor me. I'm telling you this is

1669
01:31:19,600 --> 01:31:20,359
quality stuff.

1670
01:31:21,720 --> 01:31:24,119
Speaker 1: Alex says, why can't we get Roman Catholics to just

1671
01:31:24,159 --> 01:31:27,279
give straight up answers to any questions? Well, because it's difficult,

1672
01:31:27,680 --> 01:31:31,880
that's one. Okay, Colin, what's up man? You're you're ferociously

1673
01:31:31,920 --> 01:31:33,600
thumbing down? Go ahead? What's up? Man?

1674
01:31:36,920 --> 01:31:37,119
Speaker 4: Yes?

1675
01:31:37,199 --> 01:31:40,840
Speaker 1: Hello, what's up?

1676
01:31:40,880 --> 01:31:41,039
Speaker 4: Bro?

1677
01:31:41,199 --> 01:31:42,119
Speaker 1: Hey? Go ahead?

1678
01:31:43,359 --> 01:31:49,479
Speaker 15: So the Table Nations are very accurate. I agree, but

1679
01:31:49,640 --> 01:31:51,159
I don't think it's talking about every nation.

1680
01:31:52,479 --> 01:31:55,359
Speaker 1: Okay, that's fine, man. I don't really have any hard

1681
01:31:55,399 --> 01:31:58,720
opinion to debate you on the Table of Nations and Genesis.

1682
01:32:00,479 --> 01:32:02,920
Speaker 15: Okay, but it relates to the flood in your point

1683
01:32:02,960 --> 01:32:03,960
you were making earlier.

1684
01:32:04,279 --> 01:32:06,640
Speaker 1: Okay, how do we know that it's inaccurate? What's what's

1685
01:32:06,640 --> 01:32:07,439
the proper view?

1686
01:32:09,239 --> 01:32:11,720
Speaker 15: No, I'm saying that it's accurate, but it's not talking

1687
01:32:11,720 --> 01:32:12,720
about every nation though.

1688
01:32:12,720 --> 01:32:15,479
Speaker 1: Okay, and how do we know this? What's your source

1689
01:32:15,520 --> 01:32:15,680
for this?

1690
01:32:17,159 --> 01:32:21,520
Speaker 15: Because Native Americans in Minnesota jhibwe people, can you say

1691
01:32:21,520 --> 01:32:23,319
which part of the Table Nations that come from?

1692
01:32:24,720 --> 01:32:27,239
Speaker 1: Well, the fact that there's gaps in the history of

1693
01:32:27,239 --> 01:32:29,800
the Table Nations wouldn't mean that it's not true. It

1694
01:32:29,840 --> 01:32:31,359
just means that there's a lot of things about the

1695
01:32:31,560 --> 01:32:34,479
you know, Antiediluvian post Alluvian world that we just don't know.

1696
01:32:34,560 --> 01:32:38,199
So how would that How would Native Americans necessarily disprove

1697
01:32:38,279 --> 01:32:40,199
Genesis ten being universal?

1698
01:32:42,239 --> 01:32:47,159
Speaker 15: Because well, because I think that the flood didn't kill everybody.

1699
01:32:48,279 --> 01:32:49,399
Speaker 4: It left some people alive.

1700
01:32:49,479 --> 01:32:52,880
Speaker 15: But I have faith that well because the Native Americans

1701
01:32:52,920 --> 01:32:54,359
were on the continent.

1702
01:32:53,920 --> 01:32:55,039
Speaker 4: Before the flood happened.

1703
01:32:55,319 --> 01:32:56,239
Speaker 1: How do you know that.

1704
01:32:58,079 --> 01:33:00,119
Speaker 7: I trust scientific people in opinion on.

1705
01:33:00,199 --> 01:33:04,560
Speaker 1: Then we go, yeah, good job, trust the science people.

1706
01:33:05,439 --> 01:33:09,199
Signs people said it Man dominate, what's up? I go

1707
01:33:09,680 --> 01:33:11,920
trust the science buople, then go for it. Coleman says

1708
01:33:11,920 --> 01:33:14,720
for five dollars, Sorry, I'm dude. You know Raven Ibraheim,

1709
01:33:15,239 --> 01:33:16,960
I don't is that a does he? Do you know

1710
01:33:16,960 --> 01:33:20,560
who that is? The apologist? Cool somebody mentioned that the

1711
01:33:20,560 --> 01:33:24,920
other day, but I'm not familiar with it. Dominate, what's up? Okay?

1712
01:33:24,960 --> 01:33:29,640
He can't connect. Joseph, what's up? Dominic?

1713
01:33:29,720 --> 01:33:30,039
Speaker 7: Are either?

1714
01:33:33,479 --> 01:33:48,079
Speaker 1: Dominate? What's up? Joseph? What's up? I'm mute, Joseph, I'm mute.

1715
01:33:48,800 --> 01:33:53,319
Why are you raising your hand? I'm mute. Excuse me, Jones?

1716
01:33:53,640 --> 01:33:58,520
Jones Pepe, I'm mute. Why are you raising your hand?

1717
01:33:58,560 --> 01:34:02,159
Speaker 4: Man? I'm sorry, I'm sorry to my back. Oh what's up?

1718
01:34:02,239 --> 01:34:02,399
Speaker 12: Jay?

1719
01:34:02,439 --> 01:34:03,079
Speaker 4: What's up? Nick?

1720
01:34:04,319 --> 01:34:06,039
Speaker 3: I guess for the sake of time, I'll just I

1721
01:34:06,079 --> 01:34:09,840
have some questions here. I'm a Catholic, so I do

1722
01:34:09,960 --> 01:34:10,800
watch your content.

1723
01:34:10,920 --> 01:34:13,039
Speaker 4: But uh yeah, so I guess.

1724
01:34:12,880 --> 01:34:15,199
Speaker 3: I'll just rapid fire these questions really fast.

1725
01:34:16,479 --> 01:34:18,279
Speaker 4: Thought's okay with you? Oh?

1726
01:34:18,319 --> 01:34:19,079
Speaker 1: Good with the person?

1727
01:34:19,760 --> 01:34:20,319
Speaker 4: Oh okay?

1728
01:34:20,359 --> 01:34:23,159
Speaker 3: So how do you view the Fatuma visions and the

1729
01:34:23,159 --> 01:34:25,720
fact that the children said that everyone must do the Rosary?

1730
01:34:26,000 --> 01:34:29,840
Is this evidence of the Catholic faith or Catholic truth?

1731
01:34:29,880 --> 01:34:30,239
Speaker 4: That is?

1732
01:34:30,680 --> 01:34:34,760
Speaker 1: Is uh zy tune uh maryan apparitions proof of the

1733
01:34:34,800 --> 01:34:35,520
Coptic faith.

1734
01:34:39,159 --> 01:34:40,680
Speaker 4: I've never looked into that. I'm sorry.

1735
01:34:40,880 --> 01:34:43,000
Speaker 1: Okay, Well, I mean it was like tens of thousands

1736
01:34:43,000 --> 01:34:45,159
of people like Vadima, So how am I supposed to

1737
01:34:45,199 --> 01:34:47,560
know which one is the real Marian apparition?

1738
01:34:48,720 --> 01:34:52,279
Speaker 3: So there's maryan oparitions in the Copic faith, So that's okay.

1739
01:34:52,359 --> 01:34:55,159
Speaker 1: The most famous apparition of like the last fifty or

1740
01:34:55,199 --> 01:34:56,920
sixty years is Zune Egypt.

1741
01:34:58,000 --> 01:34:58,760
Speaker 4: Okay, good?

1742
01:34:58,840 --> 01:34:58,920
Speaker 12: Uh?

1743
01:34:58,960 --> 01:35:01,479
Speaker 3: And then the next question, I guess I also have

1744
01:35:01,600 --> 01:35:02,199
Nick wants.

1745
01:35:02,039 --> 01:35:04,199
Speaker 1: To join out with Nick, feel free to say what

1746
01:35:04,239 --> 01:35:04,600
you watch?

1747
01:35:07,439 --> 01:35:10,960
Speaker 3: So, how do you view Catholic monks? Are they heretics?

1748
01:35:11,000 --> 01:35:17,600
Speaker 6: Necessarily Catholics as everyone that is outside the church is

1749
01:35:17,920 --> 01:35:19,199
going to be formally here, it.

1750
01:35:19,159 --> 01:35:20,920
Speaker 1: Wouldn't matter whether you're a monk or not. Monks are

1751
01:35:20,960 --> 01:35:23,600
just lady by the way, unless they appreciation.

1752
01:35:25,159 --> 01:35:25,520
Speaker 9: Okay.

1753
01:35:25,600 --> 01:35:30,039
Speaker 3: And then the next one is Peter Diamond's Vaticancatholic dot

1754
01:35:30,039 --> 01:35:33,119
com rebuttal video on orthodoxy is a common video.

1755
01:35:32,880 --> 01:35:34,279
Speaker 4: I see with track Catholics.

1756
01:35:34,720 --> 01:35:36,800
Speaker 3: How do you view this? And would we ever see

1757
01:35:36,800 --> 01:35:38,239
a debate between you and Peter?

1758
01:35:38,359 --> 01:35:43,199
Speaker 1: Diamond responded to it probably ten times in the last

1759
01:35:43,399 --> 01:35:45,960
seven years, so you can find all those response videos

1760
01:35:45,960 --> 01:35:48,560
onstead of a concism on my channel. Uh. And no,

1761
01:35:48,680 --> 01:35:50,840
I'll never interact with them on a personal level. For

1762
01:35:50,920 --> 01:35:56,600
other reasons. Who's next? Raise your hand? Anybody have a

1763
01:35:56,720 --> 01:35:59,600
specific f the eight? Did you want to come back

1764
01:35:59,600 --> 01:36:02,479
at it? Mean to get rid of you? I hit

1765
01:36:02,520 --> 01:36:04,840
the wrong person? Paypist. Oh we got a papist.

1766
01:36:05,000 --> 01:36:05,399
Speaker 4: What's up?

1767
01:36:05,439 --> 01:36:11,520
Speaker 1: Many Dirt says for twin dollars? Happy birthday, boss man,

1768
01:36:11,520 --> 01:36:16,199
Thank you appreciate that. Happy birthday to you too, man, papist?

1769
01:36:16,239 --> 01:36:18,479
What's up? I mute?

1770
01:36:22,000 --> 01:36:23,119
Speaker 7: Thank that we had one.

1771
01:36:24,079 --> 01:36:26,119
Speaker 1: He's trying to connect, so we'll give it a second.

1772
01:36:26,159 --> 01:36:34,439
See if he connects the skuy? What's up? Man? The skuy?

1773
01:36:34,560 --> 01:36:36,640
You want to unmute while papist is trying to connect.

1774
01:36:37,279 --> 01:36:37,439
Speaker 12: Oh?

1775
01:36:37,520 --> 01:36:42,800
Speaker 11: Hi, good, good evening, Happy birthday with day. I'm a

1776
01:36:42,960 --> 01:36:46,520
papist for your information, so I think to be patient

1777
01:36:46,560 --> 01:36:46,800
with me.

1778
01:36:47,800 --> 01:36:50,520
Speaker 4: Uh so, uh isn't talk to you first? Stuff?

1779
01:36:50,520 --> 01:36:53,439
Speaker 11: I watched your content pretty regularly. I like your discussion

1780
01:36:53,479 --> 01:36:54,399
as a sists.

1781
01:36:54,079 --> 01:36:54,840
Speaker 4: Are really awesome.

1782
01:36:55,359 --> 01:36:56,319
Speaker 11: Another lot from them.

1783
01:36:56,960 --> 01:36:58,000
Speaker 9: But I guess I had a couple of.

1784
01:36:58,039 --> 01:37:00,479
Speaker 11: Questions and that in a response to a video of

1785
01:37:00,479 --> 01:37:03,920
you made in regards to Fatima, what would you say

1786
01:37:04,079 --> 01:37:07,079
your personal stance on the whole miracle generally?

1787
01:37:07,840 --> 01:37:09,920
Speaker 1: I mean, did you hear the previous guy?

1788
01:37:10,760 --> 01:37:10,880
Speaker 4: Oh?

1789
01:37:10,960 --> 01:37:13,399
Speaker 11: Yeah, I'm wondering what you stance is on it, because

1790
01:37:13,399 --> 01:37:15,560
I know because I think the areas In the way

1791
01:37:15,600 --> 01:37:18,119
he framed his argument, I'm not trying, I'm trying to

1792
01:37:18,199 --> 01:37:20,199
understand you before I I.

1793
01:37:20,159 --> 01:37:23,479
Speaker 1: Mean, I don't I don't think any apparitions or claims

1794
01:37:23,520 --> 01:37:26,039
like this prove or just prove anything. They have very

1795
01:37:26,079 --> 01:37:29,399
little weight with me in terms of apologetics or epistemology

1796
01:37:29,479 --> 01:37:33,279
because every religion, every sect, every cult claims to have

1797
01:37:33,359 --> 01:37:37,840
miracles and visions and predictions, and it's literally impossible for

1798
01:37:37,880 --> 01:37:42,119
any individual to go and empirically, scientifically verify every one

1799
01:37:42,159 --> 01:37:44,600
of these claims. Now, I'm not saying there are no miracles,

1800
01:37:44,600 --> 01:37:48,079
but I'm saying, in my view, miracles attend and attest

1801
01:37:48,399 --> 01:37:51,119
to whatever the true faith is. They're going to accompany it,

1802
01:37:51,439 --> 01:37:55,560
but they don't themselves necessarily prove it in some strict

1803
01:37:55,600 --> 01:38:00,439
epistemic sense. So to me, it's just classed with any

1804
01:38:00,479 --> 01:38:04,880
of the other types of apparition Gara bundal or magic,

1805
01:38:04,920 --> 01:38:09,880
gorey or you know the Coptics with the Marian apparitions

1806
01:38:09,880 --> 01:38:12,039
in zie Tune, Egypt, Like, none of that proves or

1807
01:38:12,039 --> 01:38:15,000
disproves anything for me I have they have little to

1808
01:38:15,039 --> 01:38:19,720
no way, uh, but you but.

1809
01:38:19,760 --> 01:38:21,680
Speaker 11: Even if they don't have any weight for you personally,

1810
01:38:21,720 --> 01:38:24,159
but you would also understand that each apparition or each

1811
01:38:24,159 --> 01:38:28,720
individual miracle probably has a different amount of substance behind it.

1812
01:38:28,880 --> 01:38:32,479
Like obviously not every claim is valid just because it's claimed.

1813
01:38:32,520 --> 01:38:34,239
Speaker 1: But yeah, I mean I'm sure, I'm sure some of

1814
01:38:34,239 --> 01:38:38,760
them have more pedigree or more so called evidences than others.

1815
01:38:38,760 --> 01:38:41,840
I mean sure mm hm.

1816
01:38:41,880 --> 01:38:45,359
Speaker 11: And so in regards to fatima specifically, like I understand

1817
01:38:45,399 --> 01:38:47,800
that one of your major buddles to I guess the

1818
01:38:47,800 --> 01:38:50,520
fatima being used is almost kind of like, not as

1819
01:38:50,560 --> 01:38:53,199
like brute evidence towards saw some of them, but almost

1820
01:38:53,279 --> 01:38:56,760
kind of like if it were to point towards the direction,

1821
01:38:56,920 --> 01:38:58,640
it would be towards there. But I wouldn't say it

1822
01:38:58,640 --> 01:39:03,960
could be specifically to Proocosolicism, usually rebutted by saying like, well,

1823
01:39:04,520 --> 01:39:08,399
does they two improve the Coptic Orthodized Church, right? And

1824
01:39:09,359 --> 01:39:11,960
I feel like that's kind of misunderstanding the evidence behind

1825
01:39:12,000 --> 01:39:13,159
both of them, because.

1826
01:39:14,560 --> 01:39:15,960
Speaker 4: In regards to our lady thought.

1827
01:39:15,840 --> 01:39:17,079
Speaker 9: To them on our lady they tune.

1828
01:39:17,640 --> 01:39:20,840
Speaker 11: The Coptic Orthodox is very public and very very open

1829
01:39:20,920 --> 01:39:24,039
to the fact that our lady they Tune, Uh, with

1830
01:39:24,159 --> 01:39:27,600
a silent apparition where there was no doctrine bound to her,

1831
01:39:28,119 --> 01:39:31,000
but she mainly just appeared in miracle healings miracle.

1832
01:39:32,239 --> 01:39:34,039
Speaker 1: What does that have to do? You're just sort of

1833
01:39:34,079 --> 01:39:37,479
like giving this explanation and story about Matt Fatima and

1834
01:39:37,840 --> 01:39:40,479
zy Tune And how does this prove or disprove any

1835
01:39:40,600 --> 01:39:41,560
anything with a religion.

1836
01:39:42,319 --> 01:39:44,600
Speaker 11: Well, well, I'm telling you that the our lady that

1837
01:39:44,720 --> 01:39:47,319
in regards to the difference in substance between the two

1838
01:39:47,319 --> 01:39:48,920
of them, is our lady thought to him actually as

1839
01:39:49,000 --> 01:39:53,039
doctrine connected to her, like for example, the affirmation.

1840
01:39:52,600 --> 01:39:57,159
Speaker 1: Of why does doctrine connected? Why does having doctrine connected

1841
01:39:57,199 --> 01:39:59,800
to it in any way necessarily make it true or better?

1842
01:40:01,159 --> 01:40:03,279
Speaker 11: Well, because if it did happen, right, and if.

1843
01:40:03,159 --> 01:40:04,520
Speaker 4: Mary did actually show up the.

1844
01:40:05,239 --> 01:40:11,399
Speaker 1: Question her then went to the firm that's begging the question.

1845
01:40:14,000 --> 01:40:15,359
Do you understand begging the question?

1846
01:40:17,359 --> 01:40:18,680
Speaker 4: How would I be begging the questions?

1847
01:40:18,760 --> 01:40:21,800
Speaker 1: Because you change the criteria of what makes it substantive

1848
01:40:21,880 --> 01:40:24,920
and namely, if it's true, then it would have because

1849
01:40:24,920 --> 01:40:27,520
it has doctrine connected to it. If it's true, then

1850
01:40:27,520 --> 01:40:29,039
it would have doctrine connected to it.

1851
01:40:29,119 --> 01:40:32,319
Speaker 11: So it's like, oh, no, no, no, sorry, I guess

1852
01:40:32,359 --> 01:40:34,000
I'm not. I'm not really like a like a debate

1853
01:40:34,079 --> 01:40:35,159
or anything that I meant.

1854
01:40:35,920 --> 01:40:38,359
Speaker 1: But this is why debate matters, is that these bad

1855
01:40:38,479 --> 01:40:41,800
arguments convince people of things that are not convincing or

1856
01:40:41,840 --> 01:40:44,520
not good arguments. So you're missing the point of like,

1857
01:40:44,560 --> 01:40:48,880
go ahead, f d A, f DA, go ahead. What

1858
01:40:48,880 --> 01:40:53,319
do you want to say, father, deacon? Go ahead?

1859
01:40:55,319 --> 01:40:57,039
Speaker 4: How could it prove something false?

1860
01:40:59,640 --> 01:41:01,920
Speaker 21: That's oh if you guys men, it's just like, if

1861
01:41:01,960 --> 01:41:07,279
it's a false doctrine and a false religion, how can

1862
01:41:07,319 --> 01:41:09,439
you be like, we'll look at this miracle and.

1863
01:41:09,920 --> 01:41:12,920
Speaker 4: The holy theotous proving something false. That doesn't make any

1864
01:41:12,960 --> 01:41:13,319
sense to me.

1865
01:41:14,159 --> 01:41:16,079
Speaker 1: Well, they argue that it's proving a true religion.

1866
01:41:17,760 --> 01:41:19,960
Speaker 4: Well I would argue it points. I wouldn't say it's

1867
01:41:19,960 --> 01:41:20,479
stick proof.

1868
01:41:20,840 --> 01:41:22,520
Speaker 11: I'm not going to go that far into saying it,

1869
01:41:22,560 --> 01:41:23,960
but i'd say it would.

1870
01:41:23,760 --> 01:41:27,840
Speaker 21: A would that theo tokos be pointing to a false religion,

1871
01:41:28,000 --> 01:41:28,800
even pointing to.

1872
01:41:31,000 --> 01:41:33,680
Speaker 4: And stuff that's false, Like why would she have anything

1873
01:41:33,680 --> 01:41:37,119
to do with it? Oh? Well, I'm not a I'm

1874
01:41:37,119 --> 01:41:37,680
not orthodox.

1875
01:41:37,720 --> 01:41:39,199
Speaker 9: I don't believe cassim is false.

1876
01:41:39,880 --> 01:41:42,479
Speaker 1: So I'd argue that It's doesn't matter what you believe.

1877
01:41:42,520 --> 01:41:46,239
Speaker 4: It is false. I don't care what you believe. It

1878
01:41:46,319 --> 01:41:48,439
actually is false. That's the whole point.

1879
01:41:50,920 --> 01:41:52,880
Speaker 22: So you're going, but look, look at this miracle that

1880
01:41:53,000 --> 01:41:57,760
proves something that's actually false in reality, regardless of it

1881
01:41:57,800 --> 01:42:00,840
doesn't change being false because you don't believe it to

1882
01:42:00,880 --> 01:42:01,319
be false.

1883
01:42:02,960 --> 01:42:07,279
Speaker 4: It's false. I mean, what would you what would you argue.

1884
01:42:07,119 --> 01:42:10,079
Speaker 11: Happened during the event of Famamamuskin.

1885
01:42:12,199 --> 01:42:14,399
Speaker 1: But it really doesn't matter what I what we think happened,

1886
01:42:14,399 --> 01:42:16,119
because it could be I mean, it could be an

1887
01:42:16,159 --> 01:42:20,239
actual manifestation of an evil spirit. It could be a

1888
01:42:20,239 --> 01:42:22,479
government hoax and forgery. I mean, it could just be

1889
01:42:22,560 --> 01:42:24,319
a fake news story. I mean, the only evidence we

1890
01:42:24,399 --> 01:42:29,119
have is there's a you know, Portuguese news article claiming

1891
01:42:29,119 --> 01:42:31,199
that ten thousand people saw this. I mean you know

1892
01:42:31,239 --> 01:42:32,720
there were you know, there was fake news stories in

1893
01:42:32,760 --> 01:42:34,680
eighteen hundreds, right, Yeah.

1894
01:42:34,720 --> 01:42:36,479
Speaker 11: But just because there are a fake news story, it

1895
01:42:36,520 --> 01:42:38,680
doesn't mean that this news story.

1896
01:42:38,560 --> 01:42:39,079
Speaker 4: Must be fake.

1897
01:42:39,239 --> 01:42:41,880
Speaker 1: So why Okay, look, you're missing that. You're missing the

1898
01:42:41,920 --> 01:42:43,800
point that so you're.

1899
01:42:43,640 --> 01:42:48,000
Speaker 4: Saying it must be true. Jay's just saying, we don't know,

1900
01:42:48,680 --> 01:42:51,319
it could be it could be false.

1901
01:42:51,560 --> 01:42:56,119
Speaker 21: So especially if it's pointing to a false religion, like

1902
01:42:56,359 --> 01:42:58,600
that would be evidence itself that it's like, well, it's

1903
01:42:58,640 --> 01:42:59,960
obviously it's not legitimate.

1904
01:43:00,359 --> 01:43:03,560
Speaker 1: So Father Diggan's point is that evidences and these kinds

1905
01:43:03,600 --> 01:43:07,439
of events are secondary to the question of the religion

1906
01:43:07,479 --> 01:43:11,119
itself being true. So you're trying to approach the religion

1907
01:43:11,279 --> 01:43:14,960
as somehow vindicated or attested to through fatima, and he's

1908
01:43:15,000 --> 01:43:17,800
saying it's the other way around. The religion is either

1909
01:43:17,840 --> 01:43:21,399
true or false first, and that will actually determine whether

1910
01:43:21,479 --> 01:43:24,119
we accept or reject fatima. So it's not so you're

1911
01:43:24,159 --> 01:43:26,840
you're approaching it from an evidential perspective, and we're saying, well,

1912
01:43:26,920 --> 01:43:29,880
we're not evidentialist. We're not going to accept all these

1913
01:43:29,960 --> 01:43:33,439
myriads of competing claims about miracles. I mean, do you

1914
01:43:33,479 --> 01:43:37,680
accept Cybaba's claims of miracles and Hinduism, Well.

1915
01:43:37,560 --> 01:43:40,079
Speaker 11: I think every miracle claim has just needs to be

1916
01:43:40,159 --> 01:43:42,319
judging a case by case basis, not every place case.

1917
01:43:42,399 --> 01:43:44,319
Speaker 1: So this is this is why this is so okay,

1918
01:43:44,359 --> 01:43:46,640
this is so low tier and silly. How is anybody

1919
01:43:46,680 --> 01:43:49,159
going to Are you going to go through one million

1920
01:43:49,239 --> 01:43:53,039
different religious and cult claims about the miracles? Of that sect.

1921
01:43:53,119 --> 01:43:54,560
How are you going to judge all those on a

1922
01:43:54,560 --> 01:43:55,800
case by case basis?

1923
01:43:56,399 --> 01:43:59,680
Speaker 21: And also, why don't I just create a newspaper story

1924
01:44:00,560 --> 01:44:02,359
that can be judged on, like you said, on case

1925
01:44:02,399 --> 01:44:05,520
by case basis, where has.

1926
01:44:05,439 --> 01:44:08,760
Speaker 4: Dogma and it has everything that you want? Right, it'd

1927
01:44:08,800 --> 01:44:11,560
be like, well, in terms of the quality, doesn't this

1928
01:44:11,600 --> 01:44:12,239
seem better?

1929
01:44:13,159 --> 01:44:16,359
Speaker 21: So if that's your standard, I'll just we'll just create one.

1930
01:44:17,039 --> 01:44:18,760
We'll just create a news story and be like, hey,

1931
01:44:18,800 --> 01:44:23,720
trust us twenty thousand people and this new dogma was given.

1932
01:44:23,760 --> 01:44:24,600
Speaker 10: Oh it came from the.

1933
01:44:24,479 --> 01:44:28,279
Speaker 4: The propost too. Well, if that's your standard, man, that's

1934
01:44:28,359 --> 01:44:29,119
pretty bad.

1935
01:44:29,880 --> 01:44:31,960
Speaker 9: Well, I said, what was a stand?

1936
01:44:31,960 --> 01:44:33,920
Speaker 4: Well would make it stronger?

1937
01:44:33,920 --> 01:44:35,880
Speaker 9: Evidence in regards that the miracle claim.

1938
01:44:35,680 --> 01:44:38,239
Speaker 11: Would be the fact that the newspaper and a lot

1939
01:44:38,279 --> 01:44:41,760
of the witnesses were hostile. The first newspaper to publish

1940
01:44:41,319 --> 01:44:43,079
the miracle will that's what?

1941
01:44:43,239 --> 01:44:44,000
Speaker 1: But again you're.

1942
01:44:47,680 --> 01:44:50,239
Speaker 4: Yeah, like I can do everything you say about that.

1943
01:44:50,279 --> 01:44:51,600
I can recreate that.

1944
01:44:53,000 --> 01:44:55,439
Speaker 11: What would have been their motive to I guess make

1945
01:44:55,520 --> 01:44:56,880
it some kind of like Ah.

1946
01:44:57,760 --> 01:45:00,159
Speaker 1: I appreciate your question. It's enough of this. I We're

1947
01:45:00,159 --> 01:45:02,640
not gonna have to do a whole like uh, you know,

1948
01:45:02,720 --> 01:45:06,520
epistemology lecture for like, why why this or that claim

1949
01:45:06,520 --> 01:45:08,399
doesn't prove the thing? John Wison your mind.

1950
01:45:11,479 --> 01:45:14,880
Speaker 8: As you know, I've been coming through all the neo

1951
01:45:14,880 --> 01:45:17,079
Pentecostal and Pentecostal stuff.

1952
01:45:17,800 --> 01:45:20,840
Speaker 1: Well there's a lot of claims of visions in Pentecostalism too.

1953
01:45:20,960 --> 01:45:27,000
Maybe I mean, I mean, I've seen I've seen news articles.

1954
01:45:27,159 --> 01:45:32,560
I've seen news articles claiming Billy Graham appeared to me. No, no, listen,

1955
01:45:32,680 --> 01:45:37,439
what if think about uh CBN right Pat Robertson. CBN's

1956
01:45:37,600 --> 01:45:40,880
is the news outlet for Pat Robertson's evangelical nonsense. Okay,

1957
01:45:40,880 --> 01:45:43,720
pat Robertson claimed to have visions and messages from Jesus.

1958
01:45:44,920 --> 01:45:48,319
Maybe there he does a public uh Mega church thing.

1959
01:45:48,680 --> 01:45:51,760
We've had Protestants and Charismatics call in and say, I've

1960
01:45:51,800 --> 01:45:55,760
witnessed Mega Church charismatic miracles. Are you telling me that

1961
01:45:55,800 --> 01:45:59,319
God's Holy Spirit is not healing the people at my megachurch?

1962
01:45:59,800 --> 01:46:02,439
And and how is that not a direct proof of

1963
01:46:02,439 --> 01:46:05,920
my megachurch Christianity? So let's take that, and then let's

1964
01:46:05,920 --> 01:46:09,039
take the Roman cavoc fatima claim. How are they in

1965
01:46:09,079 --> 01:46:10,720
any way substantially different?

1966
01:46:13,479 --> 01:46:18,720
Speaker 8: I have evidence from watching TV in the nineteen nineties

1967
01:46:18,760 --> 01:46:21,399
that Robert Tilton healed a thousand people.

1968
01:46:22,479 --> 01:46:25,000
Speaker 1: There you go there himself.

1969
01:46:25,039 --> 01:46:29,680
Speaker 8: He made the claim on cable TV back in the nineties.

1970
01:46:29,720 --> 01:46:32,479
You can go on YouTube get all the clips of

1971
01:46:32,560 --> 01:46:38,039
Robert Tilt Tilton literally blinking and freaking out and see

1972
01:46:38,199 --> 01:46:40,920
and claiming that there are thousands of people who have

1973
01:46:41,000 --> 01:46:46,159
been healed by him, just uttering gibberish through the television screen.

1974
01:46:46,279 --> 01:46:51,640
Speaker 1: Yeah. Well, yeah, but as he said, Fatima is more substantive.

1975
01:46:52,520 --> 01:46:54,600
So now you move the goalpost and you've tacked on

1976
01:46:54,640 --> 01:46:56,640
this extra thing that well yeah, see, but Fatima has

1977
01:46:56,680 --> 01:46:59,520
more stuff going on, and it's older and it's cooler,

1978
01:46:59,600 --> 01:47:01,760
and so that's better than Pat Robertson.

1979
01:47:02,399 --> 01:47:06,560
Speaker 8: Actually there's there's kind of costal there's pentecostal.

1980
01:47:05,920 --> 01:47:07,600
Speaker 4: Visions before Fatiba.

1981
01:47:08,960 --> 01:47:14,359
Speaker 23: Interesting, it's like Descartes, uh, stupid argument that he presents

1982
01:47:14,359 --> 01:47:19,079
in the meditation. Well, it has more presentational reality, you see.

1983
01:47:20,600 --> 01:47:23,039
Speaker 1: Little big Fish has a good comment and says at

1984
01:47:23,039 --> 01:47:26,199
the Azusa Street Revival, there were many many people claiming

1985
01:47:26,239 --> 01:47:30,079
that a gigantic fireball of God shot up fifty feet

1986
01:47:30,079 --> 01:47:32,720
in the air. So that proves the Azusa Street Revival.

1987
01:47:34,359 --> 01:47:36,439
Speaker 7: Yeah, we can show something false, it doesn't matter how

1988
01:47:36,479 --> 01:47:37,000
many clients.

1989
01:47:37,800 --> 01:47:40,159
Speaker 8: And the weird thing is, I do believe that a

1990
01:47:40,159 --> 01:47:43,880
lot of the Pentecostal stuff and you know, subsequent other

1991
01:47:44,079 --> 01:47:45,199
stuff is demonic.

1992
01:47:45,239 --> 01:47:46,680
Speaker 4: I'm not saying that it isn't.

1993
01:47:47,039 --> 01:47:52,840
Speaker 8: But but there were you know, if you read into

1994
01:47:52,840 --> 01:47:55,880
that history like we have, is there were people in

1995
01:47:55,920 --> 01:47:59,920
other parts of the world who were attracted to coming

1996
01:48:00,159 --> 01:48:03,840
to California and particularly is Zusa.

1997
01:48:04,199 --> 01:48:07,319
Speaker 4: Yeah, by similar.

1998
01:48:07,000 --> 01:48:11,279
Speaker 8: Visions in other you know, like in Romania and things

1999
01:48:11,319 --> 01:48:17,079
like this in uh Armenia, and so yeah, I do believe.

2000
01:48:16,840 --> 01:48:18,119
Speaker 4: That stuff is demonic.

2001
01:48:18,359 --> 01:48:22,000
Speaker 8: But at the same time, once again, just because somebody

2002
01:48:22,079 --> 01:48:25,520
has a vision somewhere and it appears to be something

2003
01:48:25,680 --> 01:48:27,760
nice and good, it's not always the case.

2004
01:48:30,640 --> 01:48:35,039
Speaker 1: Absolutely. We'll get to the last couple of super jets here.

2005
01:48:35,039 --> 01:48:37,399
As we closed out about four hours, Ruiz says, for

2006
01:48:37,479 --> 01:48:40,720
five dollars, Fatima is actually nowadays a business who can

2007
01:48:40,760 --> 01:48:43,960
prove whether it was an apparition or was it a

2008
01:48:43,960 --> 01:48:48,640
demonic interaction? Well, ultimately it's you know, Paul says, don't

2009
01:48:48,640 --> 01:48:52,520
believe visions of angels or whoever. In Galatians. Won He says,

2010
01:48:52,720 --> 01:48:56,439
use my theology and what I delivered to you as

2011
01:48:56,560 --> 01:48:59,760
the standard and Roman Catholk's flip it around charismatic flip

2012
01:48:59,760 --> 01:49:01,720
it aroun and they make the visions and the experience

2013
01:49:01,800 --> 01:49:05,479
is the standard of the divine revelation. It's the other

2014
01:49:05,479 --> 01:49:08,640
way around, all right, guys, thank you so much. We

2015
01:49:08,640 --> 01:49:10,880
got up to about fifteen hundred life today. Shout out

2016
01:49:10,920 --> 01:49:14,880
to jim Bob with the George Landians coming in. I

2017
01:49:14,920 --> 01:49:17,399
hope you guys enjoyed my show yesterday With Jimbob, we

2018
01:49:17,439 --> 01:49:19,520
went pretty deep on a couple of movies that were

2019
01:49:19,520 --> 01:49:23,800
pretty allegorical symbolic films that were fun to decode. And

2020
01:49:23,840 --> 01:49:26,199
thanks again to Nick for joining me today and chiming

2021
01:49:26,239 --> 01:49:28,760
in with all of his apologetics. He is at Fearless Truth.

2022
01:49:28,800 --> 01:49:31,000
He is linked in the show description, so go follow Nick.

2023
01:49:31,000 --> 01:49:31,920
Thanks for coming on man.

2024
01:49:32,319 --> 01:49:34,479
Speaker 7: Yeah, definitely do live on mine too. We can try

2025
01:49:34,479 --> 01:49:35,359
to do some debates as well.

2026
01:49:35,479 --> 01:49:37,600
Speaker 1: Yeah, maybe we can get you can probably get more Muslims.

2027
01:49:37,600 --> 01:49:39,399
They don't want to come around here anymore. But they

2028
01:49:39,439 --> 01:49:40,479
don't come around here.

2029
01:49:41,119 --> 01:49:42,720
Speaker 2: I put you on a black spreen or something so

2030
01:49:42,760 --> 01:49:45,239
they don't see. And then yeah, okay, bring like the

2031
01:49:45,319 --> 01:49:46,000
terminator in the.

2032
01:49:47,880 --> 01:49:48,560
Speaker 7: Secret Weapon.

2033
01:49:48,680 --> 01:49:52,199
Speaker 1: Yeah, well, I'll have like a voice changer or something.

2034
01:49:52,279 --> 01:49:54,319
I like, I really gave away, and I'll come and

2035
01:49:54,399 --> 01:49:56,720
I'll talk like this. I just I just seem so

2036
01:49:56,880 --> 01:50:01,840
scared of Muslims that I thank you can bring Yeah right,

2037
01:50:02,359 --> 01:50:05,239
uh on Matthew coughey on man, I'll do the whole

2038
01:50:05,479 --> 01:50:08,560
debate in Matthew McConaughey. I'll make sure I didn't miss

2039
01:50:08,560 --> 01:50:10,600
any super chest Nellie says for twenty dollars, Thank you

2040
01:50:10,640 --> 01:50:12,680
so much. Happy birthday. Happen to birthday to you, man.

2041
01:50:14,840 --> 01:50:17,520
Here's another one I missed. Dcinc. Says for ten dollars,

2042
01:50:17,560 --> 01:50:19,680
Happy birthday, Jed. I discovered you at twenty twenty four.

2043
01:50:19,680 --> 01:50:22,520
I've been watching you consistently ever since. My only question

2044
01:50:22,600 --> 01:50:24,760
is do you think TAG by itself is sufficient to

2045
01:50:25,439 --> 01:50:27,640
argue the existence of the Christian God. Yes, and I

2046
01:50:27,680 --> 01:50:30,479
have a talk called from Tag to Trinity, so I

2047
01:50:30,520 --> 01:50:33,399
just renamed it so you could find it more easily. Guys,

2048
01:50:33,439 --> 01:50:36,319
be sure and follow Nick Over on Fearless Truth. Be

2049
01:50:36,359 --> 01:50:38,479
sure and follow Father digging In and as on Twitter on

2050
01:50:38,479 --> 01:50:40,640
patrisic Faith. Thank you guys for joining me. A lot

2051
01:50:40,640 --> 01:50:41,840
of fun and everybody, have a good night.