1
00:00:00,040 --> 00:00:05,719
Speaker 1: Agree with like if it's a package deal. So to me,

2
00:00:05,799 --> 00:00:08,679
it's perfectly befitting that if she's the new Eve, she

3
00:00:08,720 --> 00:00:12,880
would be like Eve, and instead of being a fallen

4
00:00:12,960 --> 00:00:17,120
creature in the sense of actual sin, she would be

5
00:00:19,079 --> 00:00:23,000
preserved from that, like Eve would have been had she

6
00:00:23,239 --> 00:00:26,960
not sinned. So I think it's a consequence of her

7
00:00:27,000 --> 00:00:29,920
as the mother of God that she was preserved from that,

8
00:00:32,000 --> 00:00:35,359
so that she could be in that intimate, special role

9
00:00:36,240 --> 00:00:38,200
of being the one that gave birth to the Son

10
00:00:38,240 --> 00:00:41,320
of God and gave to him his human nature and

11
00:00:41,359 --> 00:00:46,640
so forth. But if we think about sin as a

12
00:00:46,719 --> 00:00:49,600
specific act and not as a state of being, as

13
00:00:49,640 --> 00:00:52,159
most Calvinists and reform people do. They think of sin

14
00:00:52,200 --> 00:00:56,000
as a state of being, it's not. It's defined as James,

15
00:00:56,280 --> 00:00:58,159
excuse me by James, as an action of the will.

16
00:00:59,079 --> 00:01:02,719
There's another reason why infants aren't quote sinners, because infants

17
00:01:02,840 --> 00:01:06,280
don't commit actual sins. They don't commit sins of the will.

18
00:01:07,560 --> 00:01:09,319
The only sense in which an infant is a quote

19
00:01:09,319 --> 00:01:12,159
center is that they are deprived of the grace of

20
00:01:12,680 --> 00:01:15,359
Eden and they are fallen, and so they feel the

21
00:01:15,359 --> 00:01:18,920
effects of the sin. And sometimes Paul speaks of that

22
00:01:19,000 --> 00:01:22,400
whole class of human beings under the descent of adam

23
00:01:22,560 --> 00:01:26,400
as in sin. That does not equate to them being

24
00:01:26,599 --> 00:01:30,760
actual sinners. It equates to them having the effects of sin.

25
00:01:31,799 --> 00:01:36,799
So this is and literally no one believes this anymore,

26
00:01:37,280 --> 00:01:40,640
that infants are damned except Calvinists. Roman Catholics don't believe

27
00:01:40,680 --> 00:01:45,159
that infants are have inherited guilt. Maybe Lutherans do, I'm

28
00:01:45,159 --> 00:01:47,640
not sure, but there's literally no one else that believes

29
00:01:47,640 --> 00:01:49,719
this except for Calvinists. So you're not going to be

30
00:01:49,840 --> 00:01:53,239
Orthodox or Catholic if you believe that infants have actual sin,

31
00:01:53,280 --> 00:02:16,319
which is kind of stupid if you think about it. Yep,

32
00:02:21,439 --> 00:02:31,039
go ahead, Africa, you've made all these videos about me.

33
00:02:31,080 --> 00:02:38,960
Go ahead. I guess you can't get an internet connection

34
00:02:39,000 --> 00:02:45,719
because he keeps dropping off Africa without borders. Go ahead.

35
00:02:54,800 --> 00:03:00,759
I'm guessing your internet doesn't work, dude, I don't know, James.

36
00:03:03,439 --> 00:03:06,120
Speaker 2: Yeah, I'd like to talk about fruits of the spirit

37
00:03:07,080 --> 00:03:09,639
is defined in the Epistle of the Glicians, and why

38
00:03:09,680 --> 00:03:12,960
you seem to think they're optional and deride them as

39
00:03:13,199 --> 00:03:16,560
what was the term you use, like piety signaling, like.

40
00:03:16,520 --> 00:03:17,800
Speaker 3: The I'd like you to explain that.

41
00:03:17,919 --> 00:03:21,879
Speaker 1: So why what does that have to do with today's discussion?

42
00:03:24,639 --> 00:03:28,080
Speaker 2: You defended mocking and demeaning people with a petty of

43
00:03:28,199 --> 00:03:30,039
use and imitation.

44
00:03:31,199 --> 00:03:34,919
Speaker 1: Right, How pious are you? Are you praying right now?

45
00:03:38,319 --> 00:03:39,240
Speaker 3: Are you capable of?

46
00:03:39,479 --> 00:03:41,800
Speaker 1: Are you? Are you? Are you on the internet to

47
00:03:41,879 --> 00:03:44,400
talk about how much you pray?

48
00:03:45,199 --> 00:03:46,639
Speaker 3: I just told you why I am on the internet

49
00:03:46,639 --> 00:03:47,360
and asking.

50
00:03:47,039 --> 00:03:50,439
Speaker 1: You these questions? Is that right? Is that right? Do

51
00:03:50,479 --> 00:03:52,240
you have the fruits of the spirit right now?

52
00:03:55,719 --> 00:03:57,240
Speaker 3: You have nothing to say?

53
00:03:57,719 --> 00:03:57,919
Speaker 1: Yeah?

54
00:03:57,919 --> 00:04:03,479
Speaker 4: I can't defend myself against point millers like yourself. You're

55
00:04:03,520 --> 00:04:06,039
the most plious Orthodox person on the web right.

56
00:04:05,879 --> 00:04:09,960
Speaker 2: Now, so pas they can like read the Bible. Well,

57
00:04:11,439 --> 00:04:14,360
you know, but you're a malignant narcissist people.

58
00:04:14,120 --> 00:04:16,199
Speaker 1: Is that right? Is that right?

59
00:04:17,800 --> 00:04:18,040
Speaker 3: Yeah?

60
00:04:18,240 --> 00:04:18,639
Speaker 1: It is right?

61
00:04:18,720 --> 00:04:21,000
Speaker 4: Can you demonstrate that I'm a malignant narcissist?

62
00:04:21,720 --> 00:04:21,920
Speaker 2: Oh?

63
00:04:22,839 --> 00:04:25,240
Speaker 3: You do that for me actually by opening your mouth?

64
00:04:26,000 --> 00:04:27,720
Speaker 1: Yeah, so you spew all this venom, but I'm a

65
00:04:27,800 --> 00:04:29,120
malignant narcissist.

66
00:04:30,759 --> 00:04:33,519
Speaker 2: Well, two things can be true simultaneously. I mean, perhaps

67
00:04:33,560 --> 00:04:34,160
you can fund.

68
00:04:35,000 --> 00:04:36,720
Speaker 1: You can spew a venom. You just admited the here's

69
00:04:36,759 --> 00:04:43,160
being venom? Is that afraard of the spirit speing venom?

70
00:04:43,199 --> 00:04:46,680
Silence only you are entitled.

71
00:04:47,319 --> 00:04:47,839
Speaker 5: Well, I mean I.

72
00:04:47,800 --> 00:04:52,199
Speaker 1: Don't think jugs are being venom.

73
00:04:52,399 --> 00:04:54,439
Speaker 2: I mean you've refused to defend your position and you've

74
00:04:54,480 --> 00:04:55,879
refuse to explain yourself.

75
00:04:55,879 --> 00:04:58,759
Speaker 5: You just I don't even think you're a real person.

76
00:04:58,839 --> 00:05:03,959
I think you're faired. I think you're a faired. I

77
00:05:04,000 --> 00:05:05,800
think you're a faired. You just said that you can

78
00:05:05,879 --> 00:05:08,199
spoil all, you can spere all the fenom.

79
00:05:10,079 --> 00:05:11,920
Speaker 3: Well that this is what cry bullies do.

80
00:05:12,040 --> 00:05:15,399
Speaker 1: It's like they don't I'm a cry bully. I mean

81
00:05:15,399 --> 00:05:16,920
I'm letting you say all this stuff. How are you?

82
00:05:16,959 --> 00:05:17,839
Are you getting bullied?

83
00:05:19,600 --> 00:05:26,120
Speaker 3: Well, yeah, I think.

84
00:05:28,560 --> 00:05:34,360
Speaker 1: Sir, Well, we all need to get underneath you so

85
00:05:34,399 --> 00:05:36,519
that you can pray over us, so that we have

86
00:05:36,560 --> 00:05:49,759
the fruits of the spirit. Go ahead, Hell yeah, Well hello, Jake, what.

87
00:05:52,959 --> 00:05:54,800
Speaker 3: I on my own?

88
00:05:58,000 --> 00:06:00,000
Speaker 6: I wanted to talk about soda scriptures.

89
00:06:00,279 --> 00:06:02,040
Speaker 1: I'm sure you do after all your videos.

90
00:06:02,120 --> 00:06:07,040
Speaker 6: Yeah, just to say that I've watched a lot of

91
00:06:07,040 --> 00:06:07,680
your videos.

92
00:06:07,839 --> 00:06:09,759
Speaker 1: I know you've made a lot of videos. What about it?

93
00:06:11,439 --> 00:06:13,759
Speaker 6: And I found it helpful going to speak as corner

94
00:06:13,879 --> 00:06:21,360
to use peace of positionism mm hmm yeah, solar scriptura.

95
00:06:23,560 --> 00:06:27,519
My first point is when we look at Jesus. Did

96
00:06:27,600 --> 00:06:31,839
Jesus use tradition in the way that you would envision

97
00:06:31,879 --> 00:06:34,240
it in your definition of tradition?

98
00:06:34,800 --> 00:06:35,120
Speaker 1: Yes?

99
00:06:37,720 --> 00:06:38,600
Speaker 7: Could you show us.

100
00:06:38,480 --> 00:06:40,839
Speaker 1: That well he specifically.

101
00:06:41,480 --> 00:06:44,040
Speaker 6: Could you give us the Eastern Orthodox definition and then

102
00:06:44,079 --> 00:06:44,680
show us.

103
00:06:44,639 --> 00:06:48,360
Speaker 1: He specifically said that the Word of God was himself

104
00:06:48,560 --> 00:06:50,519
and not the books to the Pharisees.

105
00:06:52,759 --> 00:06:55,519
Speaker 6: No, you're not listening to me.

106
00:06:56,079 --> 00:06:56,519
Speaker 3: Here we go.

107
00:06:57,560 --> 00:07:00,879
Speaker 6: I'm asking you to give me the definition of Orthodox

108
00:07:00,879 --> 00:07:02,079
field standing tradition.

109
00:07:02,199 --> 00:07:05,439
Speaker 1: Yeah, it's the full revelation, whether containing the written text

110
00:07:05,639 --> 00:07:07,480
or the oral preaching of the apostles.

111
00:07:07,519 --> 00:07:09,839
Speaker 3: How's that okay?

112
00:07:10,480 --> 00:07:12,920
Speaker 1: The faith once we're all committed to the saints.

113
00:07:15,040 --> 00:07:17,040
Speaker 6: Yeah, no, I think you still don't give it a.

114
00:07:17,040 --> 00:07:20,160
Speaker 1: Full definition, right, So you go make more YouTube videos?

115
00:07:22,879 --> 00:07:25,839
Speaker 6: You're not You're not bringing in the more.

116
00:07:27,160 --> 00:07:35,800
Speaker 1: Yeah, goodbye. This is a person who just wants content.

117
00:07:35,839 --> 00:07:39,160
He makes endless live streams, talks about soul scriptural that's

118
00:07:39,160 --> 00:07:41,879
all he wants to talk about. So I give him

119
00:07:42,199 --> 00:07:45,639
very simple, clear definitions as to what the tradition is

120
00:07:45,759 --> 00:07:49,720
the fullness of the divine revelation, written and textual. He

121
00:07:49,720 --> 00:07:52,759
doesn't care. He just wants something to talk about in

122
00:07:52,800 --> 00:07:55,240
his live stream. Does anybody who's a Protestant or disagrees

123
00:07:55,319 --> 00:08:17,959
wants to come on anybody else. There's still fifteen people

124
00:08:18,199 --> 00:08:20,399
or any of you Protestant. They might have an actual

125
00:08:20,480 --> 00:08:23,560
argument today. There's something going on. It's it's a lot

126
00:08:23,600 --> 00:08:27,519
of ferile people today.

127
00:08:30,600 --> 00:08:35,559
Speaker 8: Really, you're remember your nerds is just there. Either fruits

128
00:08:35,559 --> 00:08:38,639
are the spirit or an argument. The fruits are the spirit,

129
00:08:40,320 --> 00:08:41,080
fear true, your.

130
00:08:41,039 --> 00:08:54,559
Speaker 1: Spirit, leaguer, Ligair, Ligair, I'm you. The year of love

131
00:08:54,679 --> 00:09:00,440
is being severely tested. All right? Moving on? Was raising

132
00:09:00,480 --> 00:09:10,679
their hand? Lee, Oh my gosh, here we go. I'm mute,

133
00:09:10,679 --> 00:09:19,120
and then we'll go to the tridentine Catholic Lee, I'm mute.

134
00:09:20,799 --> 00:09:20,919
Speaker 9: Yo.

135
00:09:21,240 --> 00:09:23,279
Speaker 1: Can you hear me barely? What's up?

136
00:09:25,200 --> 00:09:29,360
Speaker 10: So I might have a disagreement. Maybe what's your position?

137
00:09:29,519 --> 00:09:32,000
Because I was I watched some of your videos and

138
00:09:32,000 --> 00:09:35,559
I was wondering. I heard you say that you don't

139
00:09:35,600 --> 00:09:40,039
think that there's reproduction like giving birth in the Escaton?

140
00:09:40,679 --> 00:09:43,080
Speaker 3: Is that? Did I get that right?

141
00:09:43,639 --> 00:09:45,000
Speaker 1: Yeah? Are you a Mormon?

142
00:09:46,960 --> 00:09:47,240
Speaker 8: No?

143
00:09:47,240 --> 00:09:51,519
Speaker 11: No, I'm just I'm just agnosticconnessy which one fits best

144
00:09:51,559 --> 00:09:56,840
for me? Okay, So if you don't think there's a

145
00:09:56,840 --> 00:10:00,600
reproduction in the Escaton, if we go back to Genesis.

146
00:10:01,919 --> 00:10:10,080
Speaker 3: It actually describes that, however, became painful as a punishment

147
00:10:10,120 --> 00:10:10,600
of the fall.

148
00:10:11,799 --> 00:10:16,120
Speaker 10: It seems like that there is birth, there is reproduction

149
00:10:16,200 --> 00:10:19,120
in the Esketon, but it just became painful.

150
00:10:20,279 --> 00:10:22,799
Speaker 1: Would you agree with that Eden is not the Esketon?

151
00:10:25,639 --> 00:10:29,440
Speaker 10: Yeah, but it's a close that's the closest thing that

152
00:10:29,440 --> 00:10:30,360
we can get, right.

153
00:10:30,519 --> 00:10:33,240
Speaker 1: That doesn't mean that every feature of Eden carries over

154
00:10:33,279 --> 00:10:35,440
into the Esketon. So it's a non sequitor.

155
00:10:36,639 --> 00:10:40,559
Speaker 10: Well, we car we care, we can, we carry our

156
00:10:40,600 --> 00:10:41,919
bodies with us.

157
00:10:41,960 --> 00:10:44,159
Speaker 1: Yeah, but that doesn't mean that everything that our bodies

158
00:10:44,200 --> 00:10:48,080
do in the fallen state translates into the same functions

159
00:10:48,080 --> 00:10:48,919
in the eternal state.

160
00:10:49,960 --> 00:10:52,480
Speaker 10: So then why do you not think that there's reproduction

161
00:10:52,559 --> 00:10:53,759
specifically any eston.

162
00:10:54,320 --> 00:10:57,440
Speaker 1: There's not any reason to think that there is. There's

163
00:10:57,440 --> 00:10:59,639
no tradition or statements that I'm aware of about it.

164
00:10:59,679 --> 00:11:02,080
And seems to speak as if we will be like

165
00:11:02,159 --> 00:11:06,000
the angels and not being involved in biological quitas.

166
00:11:08,320 --> 00:11:09,320
Speaker 3: Okay, is there.

167
00:11:12,480 --> 00:11:14,559
Speaker 1: When he says that we will be like the angels,

168
00:11:15,919 --> 00:11:19,639
not marrying or being given in marriage?

169
00:11:21,600 --> 00:11:28,559
Speaker 3: Yep ollo, yep, Yeah.

170
00:11:28,559 --> 00:11:31,360
Speaker 12: I just have a question. I'm not sure you're familiar

171
00:11:31,399 --> 00:11:33,679
with like True Orthodoxy dot Org. I just have a

172
00:11:33,759 --> 00:11:36,559
question why they like criticize the toll House, Like is

173
00:11:36,559 --> 00:11:39,200
this like just like them being like unique, just criticizing

174
00:11:39,200 --> 00:11:41,399
like personal belief saying it's like the lastmis and heretical,

175
00:11:41,799 --> 00:11:43,159
Like how the dominies kind of do like for the

176
00:11:43,200 --> 00:11:46,360
coredemtrics or is there like a historical basis behind like

177
00:11:46,480 --> 00:11:47,639
the condemnation.

178
00:11:47,200 --> 00:11:47,879
Speaker 3: For it that they make.

179
00:11:49,159 --> 00:11:51,799
Speaker 1: I mean, there's a room for interpretation as to how

180
00:11:51,879 --> 00:11:55,600
literal the toll hases out are versus a degree of

181
00:11:56,000 --> 00:12:01,399
symbolic imagery in the iconography or the lives of the

182
00:12:01,440 --> 00:12:04,440
saints and that kind of stuff. But I mean it's

183
00:12:04,480 --> 00:12:07,639
not dogma in the sense of it being spoken of

184
00:12:07,679 --> 00:12:09,120
at a council, but I think it is part of

185
00:12:09,120 --> 00:12:11,039
the Orthodox liturgical mystical tradition.

186
00:12:12,840 --> 00:12:14,639
Speaker 12: But do you know why that, like other groups like

187
00:12:14,679 --> 00:12:16,679
True or than Us, Like, what's the reasoning for like

188
00:12:16,720 --> 00:12:17,480
condemning it?

189
00:12:17,519 --> 00:12:18,759
Speaker 3: Is it because because they look.

190
00:12:18,600 --> 00:12:21,039
Speaker 1: For anything to try to bring people into their groups

191
00:12:21,080 --> 00:12:23,519
and say that they've got everything wrong in their heretics,

192
00:12:23,559 --> 00:12:24,679
so they just look for something.

193
00:12:26,159 --> 00:12:27,799
Speaker 12: So it's kind of like the Diamond Brothers in a way,

194
00:12:27,840 --> 00:12:29,399
like how they can them like the Curry dimtrics and

195
00:12:29,440 --> 00:12:30,279
all that like that.

196
00:12:30,320 --> 00:12:32,679
Speaker 1: In a sense, yeah, I think that the set of

197
00:12:32,720 --> 00:12:37,600
a contests are perfect parallels to I mean, true Orthodoxy

198
00:12:37,720 --> 00:12:40,320
is like not even a thing. It's like infinitely smaller

199
00:12:40,320 --> 00:12:43,399
even than traditional Catholicism. It's like a few thousand people

200
00:12:43,399 --> 00:12:43,960
on the internet.

201
00:12:44,279 --> 00:12:47,200
Speaker 3: So yeah, all right, that was my question.

202
00:12:47,279 --> 00:12:52,320
Speaker 1: Bro see them man, thank you? Well that didn't that.

203
00:12:52,879 --> 00:12:56,559
He was a lot cooler than I expected. So when

204
00:12:56,559 --> 00:13:07,919
I see tradcat, I'm like, oh, no, yep, hello.

205
00:13:09,679 --> 00:13:12,159
Speaker 3: Can you hear me? Yep, yeah, Hi.

206
00:13:14,200 --> 00:13:18,000
Speaker 13: I wanted to come in quite earlier just to address

207
00:13:19,080 --> 00:13:21,080
I know there was someone in the beginning that was

208
00:13:21,159 --> 00:13:26,320
asking about the veneration of the model of God, and

209
00:13:27,399 --> 00:13:31,240
I wanted it to actually interject and to just add

210
00:13:33,080 --> 00:13:40,440
just a quick, a quick quick on this on the scripture,

211
00:13:41,279 --> 00:13:44,879
just because I'm not sure if you know, but Jesus

212
00:13:45,000 --> 00:13:51,000
himself when he gets his feet, I think his feats.

213
00:13:52,039 --> 00:13:56,440
Speaker 3: With by the woman, he.

214
00:13:56,799 --> 00:14:00,000
Speaker 13: Actually says that that woman, because of what he did

215
00:14:00,039 --> 00:14:06,519
it you will be commemorated. Yeah, poor generations. And so

216
00:14:07,240 --> 00:14:10,039
that's that's basically, you know, that's basically what we do.

217
00:14:10,279 --> 00:14:16,320
We we we we venerate her and we celebrate. We've

218
00:14:16,320 --> 00:14:19,879
got our own feet day with her. If you know,

219
00:14:20,000 --> 00:14:24,480
if if that's what Jesus is saying about how we

220
00:14:25,720 --> 00:14:29,639
appreciate certain people you have done virtuous acts?

221
00:14:29,759 --> 00:14:30,960
Speaker 1: Yes, what what?

222
00:14:31,000 --> 00:14:33,679
Speaker 13: Why Why couldn't it be you know, the same thing

223
00:14:33,840 --> 00:14:38,080
for the Virgin Mary, you know, the Mother of God,

224
00:14:38,120 --> 00:14:43,879
who is you know, almost infinitely more blessed and virtuous.

225
00:14:43,360 --> 00:14:44,240
Speaker 3: Than the.

226
00:14:46,080 --> 00:14:48,759
Speaker 1: Woman. That's actually a great point. I appreciate that. Yeah,

227
00:14:48,759 --> 00:14:50,440
and and and if you think about it too, it's

228
00:14:50,440 --> 00:14:54,720
also kind of an indirect argument for liturgy and the

229
00:14:54,720 --> 00:15:00,399
beauty of the worship of God. Right, Jesus rebukes the

230
00:15:00,440 --> 00:15:06,480
other woman for fussing about the costly oil of spikenard.

231
00:15:07,440 --> 00:15:11,879
So no, we should have honor and worship for God,

232
00:15:12,399 --> 00:15:16,399
and there's nothing wrong with it being done in a beautiful,

233
00:15:16,559 --> 00:15:26,559
esthetically pleasing way. Priest Haka, this is a black Eber Israelite.

234
00:15:27,799 --> 00:15:34,799
Speaker 14: My main man, Jay, can you hear me? Yeah, I

235
00:15:34,840 --> 00:15:37,519
was just trying to see because I did a video.

236
00:15:37,919 --> 00:15:38,600
Speaker 3: Well, I did.

237
00:15:38,440 --> 00:15:42,320
Speaker 14: A response video to your video when you were searching

238
00:15:42,399 --> 00:15:44,759
us up and you were looking at Captain Saizari. I

239
00:15:44,759 --> 00:15:47,600
gotta believe it was and a few other Israelites in

240
00:15:47,639 --> 00:15:48,240
our community.

241
00:15:48,320 --> 00:15:50,759
Speaker 1: Are you the one that threatened to whip me until

242
00:15:50,759 --> 00:15:51,720
my flesh fell off?

243
00:15:53,159 --> 00:15:55,200
Speaker 14: What I remember saying that?

244
00:15:55,240 --> 00:15:57,120
Speaker 1: But I mean, are you the guy that did the video?

245
00:15:58,759 --> 00:15:59,919
Speaker 3: Well much video?

246
00:16:00,559 --> 00:16:02,600
Speaker 1: I don't know, the black keeper Israelite guy that did

247
00:16:02,600 --> 00:16:04,799
a video call me out. I don't know. I don't

248
00:16:04,840 --> 00:16:05,840
know which one you are.

249
00:16:06,080 --> 00:16:07,720
Speaker 14: I may not be the only one who did a

250
00:16:07,799 --> 00:16:09,120
video on you, Okay.

251
00:16:09,679 --> 00:16:10,559
Speaker 3: So I was just.

252
00:16:10,480 --> 00:16:12,840
Speaker 14: Trying to see if you are interested in any form

253
00:16:12,840 --> 00:16:14,639
of the base with any leaders in the community.

254
00:16:15,240 --> 00:16:18,919
Speaker 3: No, okay, don't worry. Thanks man, appreciate it.

255
00:16:30,519 --> 00:16:32,120
Speaker 1: I mean, I'm not trying to be mean, but it's

256
00:16:32,159 --> 00:16:36,360
you know, that's that's like one of the craziest insane

257
00:16:36,399 --> 00:16:38,320
cults I've ever heard of.

258
00:16:39,279 --> 00:16:39,720
Speaker 3: So I don't.

259
00:16:39,799 --> 00:16:41,919
Speaker 1: I mean, these are the people who think that the

260
00:16:41,960 --> 00:16:46,200
word Jewish means kind of jew That's what they think.

261
00:16:46,240 --> 00:16:48,399
I'm not joking. That's like that's what they literally, that's

262
00:16:48,399 --> 00:16:53,960
their theology, Like they can't do grammar. The cult is

263
00:16:54,000 --> 00:17:03,879
based on not being able to do grammar. Uh huh?

264
00:17:03,960 --> 00:17:04,720
Speaker 3: Hey how you doing?

265
00:17:04,799 --> 00:17:05,039
Speaker 15: Jay?

266
00:17:06,079 --> 00:17:06,319
Speaker 1: Hey?

267
00:17:06,359 --> 00:17:07,039
Speaker 3: Everyone else?

268
00:17:10,319 --> 00:17:13,480
Speaker 16: Hey Jae, I came here because I'm a Protestant. Well,

269
00:17:14,000 --> 00:17:18,000
I guess you could say former Protestant, but because I've been,

270
00:17:18,160 --> 00:17:21,920
you know, converting to Catholicism. But I kind of wanted

271
00:17:21,960 --> 00:17:27,880
to ask a question about Easter because I see a

272
00:17:27,880 --> 00:17:30,039
lot of difference and I don't want to know.

273
00:17:30,160 --> 00:17:31,319
Speaker 3: Your thoughts of philioquey.

274
00:17:32,880 --> 00:17:41,640
Speaker 16: Okay, go ahead, yeah, so yeah, so do you what's

275
00:17:41,759 --> 00:17:42,640
the orthodox position?

276
00:17:42,720 --> 00:17:43,119
Speaker 3: Do y'all?

277
00:17:43,200 --> 00:17:47,640
Speaker 16: Do y'all deny that there's any procession of the Holy Spirit.

278
00:17:47,400 --> 00:17:47,920
Speaker 3: Through the Sun.

279
00:17:49,799 --> 00:17:52,759
Speaker 1: No, there is a procession through the Sun, but it

280
00:17:52,839 --> 00:17:55,440
is not his existential hypostatic origin.

281
00:17:57,000 --> 00:17:59,759
Speaker 16: Okay, But if it's the case that the Holy Spirit,

282
00:18:01,519 --> 00:18:05,880
if it's the case that the Holy Spirit proceeds through

283
00:18:05,880 --> 00:18:10,279
the Son, right, then then what really is any difference

284
00:18:10,279 --> 00:18:13,839
between the ultodox position of PHILIOKOI.

285
00:18:13,400 --> 00:18:16,160
Speaker 1: Are not Philly because that's not the position that's laid

286
00:18:16,200 --> 00:18:18,640
out of the Council of Lions in Florence. That position

287
00:18:18,720 --> 00:18:22,519
says that there's a double eternal hypothetic principle from the

288
00:18:22,559 --> 00:18:25,720
Father and the Son, who function as a single principle

289
00:18:25,839 --> 00:18:27,960
of the origin of the Holy Spirit. And that's something

290
00:18:27,960 --> 00:18:30,359
that we could never accept because it gets to the son,

291
00:18:30,559 --> 00:18:32,960
the unique hypostidic property that identifies the Father.

292
00:18:34,279 --> 00:18:36,160
Speaker 16: Well, you would agree that there's going to be a

293
00:18:36,200 --> 00:18:39,319
distinction between being begata and being preceded.

294
00:18:39,400 --> 00:18:42,920
Speaker 1: Right, that has nothing to do with what I just said.

295
00:18:44,720 --> 00:18:46,839
Speaker 16: Well, yes it does, because the Catholic, like like you said,

296
00:18:46,839 --> 00:18:49,160
the Catholic position is going to be that the.

297
00:18:49,079 --> 00:18:50,359
Speaker 3: Father and the Son is the one.

298
00:18:50,200 --> 00:18:53,039
Speaker 16: Principle that the Holy Spirit inspire rates from.

299
00:18:53,160 --> 00:18:55,759
Speaker 1: There's nothing that two persons in the Trinity share, as

300
00:18:55,759 --> 00:18:58,640
the Cappadocians say that one lacks, and so you've created

301
00:18:58,680 --> 00:19:03,720
a diad. So you reject you created that case because

302
00:19:03,759 --> 00:19:06,799
the Father and the Son are a united principle of

303
00:19:07,279 --> 00:19:11,759
power and causation that the Spirit does not have. So

304
00:19:11,799 --> 00:19:13,359
that's an imbalance, that's a diad.

305
00:19:14,839 --> 00:19:18,440
Speaker 16: That but that's that's what distinguishes being forgotten or the

306
00:19:18,480 --> 00:19:21,119
Son being forgotten and the and the Spirit being preceded.

307
00:19:21,480 --> 00:19:23,119
Speaker 3: Right, because of.

308
00:19:23,079 --> 00:19:26,640
Speaker 16: The amount of people that takes uh that takes part,

309
00:19:26,640 --> 00:19:29,000
are the amount of persons that take part.

310
00:19:28,880 --> 00:19:32,319
Speaker 3: In preceding the Holy Spirit, right, at least.

311
00:19:32,119 --> 00:19:34,680
Speaker 16: In the Catholic view, Right, we can make the case

312
00:19:34,680 --> 00:19:37,440
that the Holy Spirit truly is preceded and not just

313
00:19:37,519 --> 00:19:39,279
be gotten right from the Father.

314
00:19:40,359 --> 00:19:43,799
Speaker 1: So you're repeating Roman Catholic apologetic pap apologetics. That doesn't

315
00:19:43,839 --> 00:19:46,480
even address like the level of which we're talking about

316
00:19:46,480 --> 00:19:48,400
this question. So can you repeat to me what my

317
00:19:48,519 --> 00:19:49,079
argument was?

318
00:19:50,359 --> 00:19:50,680
Speaker 17: Yeah?

319
00:19:50,920 --> 00:19:53,880
Speaker 16: Yeah, Yeah, the argument was that, well, you pretty much

320
00:19:53,880 --> 00:19:54,400
just laid out.

321
00:19:54,279 --> 00:19:54,720
Speaker 3: Of our position.

322
00:19:54,799 --> 00:19:57,400
Speaker 16: Then you said that, oh, I've created a diead because

323
00:19:57,440 --> 00:20:00,319
it's going to be like the two persons is the

324
00:20:00,319 --> 00:20:04,240
father and son being the one principle in which, right,

325
00:20:05,079 --> 00:20:10,319
the Holy Spirit pretty much originates from or essence from that?

326
00:20:10,400 --> 00:20:13,880
Speaker 1: Is that your position? And why is that a problem?

327
00:20:13,960 --> 00:20:14,200
Speaker 18: Okay?

328
00:20:14,240 --> 00:20:15,119
Speaker 3: I don't see the problem.

329
00:20:15,839 --> 00:20:18,359
Speaker 1: Why did I say that's Why did I say that's

330
00:20:18,400 --> 00:20:20,720
a problem?

331
00:20:20,799 --> 00:20:22,319
Speaker 16: Well, you said you said it was a problems because

332
00:20:22,319 --> 00:20:24,440
I created a diead, right.

333
00:20:24,319 --> 00:20:28,319
Speaker 1: And why is that? I said specifically there's a reason why.

334
00:20:28,559 --> 00:20:31,119
Speaker 16: Yeah, because the father and the son is the one principle?

335
00:20:31,720 --> 00:20:32,960
Speaker 1: And why is that a problem?

336
00:20:35,319 --> 00:20:35,839
Speaker 3: You tell me?

337
00:20:36,160 --> 00:20:40,519
Speaker 1: Okay? I mean, I'm trying really hard to be patient

338
00:20:40,559 --> 00:20:44,279
with you guys, but like I literally stated explicitly what

339
00:20:44,319 --> 00:20:46,960
the problem is, and you've come with like level one

340
00:20:47,039 --> 00:20:48,799
understanding and you want to debate it, which is fine.

341
00:20:48,799 --> 00:20:51,359
I don't mind doing it. But did it never occur

342
00:20:51,480 --> 00:20:53,839
to you? Did it ever occur to you to maybe

343
00:20:53,920 --> 00:20:55,960
read some of the arguments on this before you want

344
00:20:55,960 --> 00:20:56,799
to debate it?

345
00:20:57,359 --> 00:20:59,960
Speaker 3: Yeah, yeah, I know, so I I what from?

346
00:21:00,039 --> 00:21:02,079
Speaker 1: But you can't restate my argument? So you're not Are

347
00:21:02,079 --> 00:21:04,200
you not listening to what I said? Or you just

348
00:21:04,200 --> 00:21:05,880
didn't catch it. You want me stated again?

349
00:21:06,519 --> 00:21:09,240
Speaker 16: Well, will your position on the matter would be that

350
00:21:09,480 --> 00:21:10,880
the Father is the only principle?

351
00:21:10,960 --> 00:21:11,119
Speaker 3: Right?

352
00:21:11,440 --> 00:21:13,680
Speaker 1: And who said that? Anybody in church history?

353
00:21:15,119 --> 00:21:16,480
Speaker 3: Well, I mean I'm asking you.

354
00:21:16,319 --> 00:21:18,640
Speaker 1: Do you know of any famous church fathers that were

355
00:21:18,680 --> 00:21:23,720
involved in any ecumenical councils that maybe said that, I.

356
00:21:23,720 --> 00:21:28,680
Speaker 16: Know church fathers that believe in Philly open Do you yeah, Augustine,

357
00:21:29,160 --> 00:21:29,559
mm hmm?

358
00:21:32,079 --> 00:21:33,720
Speaker 3: Do you accept that or do you deny that?

359
00:21:35,599 --> 00:21:38,799
Speaker 1: No? I mean I don't accept his teaching. No, it's wrong.

360
00:21:40,240 --> 00:21:43,240
Speaker 3: Oh oh so he does, so he does accept fully absolutely,

361
00:21:43,359 --> 00:21:45,160
But he's the same thing your church.

362
00:21:45,799 --> 00:21:47,359
Speaker 1: Do you really think that these are owns that we

363
00:21:47,400 --> 00:21:50,359
haven't addressed these arguments probably five hundred times? I mean.

364
00:21:52,400 --> 00:21:54,519
Speaker 3: No, I mean that's I know the coopium that you

365
00:21:54,559 --> 00:21:55,079
guys use.

366
00:21:56,559 --> 00:21:58,440
Speaker 1: So let's let's get into that, all right, you want

367
00:21:58,440 --> 00:22:01,480
to do this, let's do it. What council confirmed the

368
00:22:01,519 --> 00:22:05,200
Doctor of the Trinity for the Universal Church the council.

369
00:22:05,400 --> 00:22:05,759
Speaker 3: I see that.

370
00:22:05,880 --> 00:22:07,519
Speaker 1: No, so you see, you don't even know the first

371
00:22:07,599 --> 00:22:09,559
of this. You don't even know level one of this debate.

372
00:22:10,000 --> 00:22:12,400
It's the second Econmoical Council. Who are the three fathers

373
00:22:12,440 --> 00:22:14,720
that are the most important of the second Ecamoical Council?

374
00:22:16,279 --> 00:22:17,000
Speaker 7: The second was.

375
00:22:19,000 --> 00:22:20,839
Speaker 1: So you don't know anything, and you're trying to debate.

376
00:22:21,559 --> 00:22:25,759
Speaker 16: Are you talking about the goal of Philio exactly?

377
00:22:25,839 --> 00:22:28,400
Speaker 1: So you don't even know the Cappadocian doctrine of the

378
00:22:28,440 --> 00:22:30,640
trinity that's outlined at constant double one.

379
00:22:33,440 --> 00:22:36,839
Speaker 3: I don't know. I mean, I is it like monarch correct?

380
00:22:37,480 --> 00:22:42,920
Speaker 1: Yes? Yeah, yeah, And that's not a filioquy doctrine because

381
00:22:44,359 --> 00:22:46,599
tell me what the hypostatic property of the father is?

382
00:22:47,839 --> 00:22:49,960
Speaker 3: The hypostatic property.

383
00:22:49,559 --> 00:22:52,039
Speaker 1: So you don't even know the basic Cappadocian terms. You

384
00:22:52,079 --> 00:22:54,119
don't even know our basic position, and you're trying to

385
00:22:54,160 --> 00:22:56,319
argue with me and call it you call it code.

386
00:22:59,160 --> 00:23:02,559
Speaker 16: To tell you, Yeah, the hyposthetic property of the father

387
00:23:02,720 --> 00:23:05,599
is that he's the one that again he's he's the

388
00:23:05,599 --> 00:23:07,200
one principal, right.

389
00:23:07,200 --> 00:23:09,000
Speaker 1: Oh, he's the one principal. But you just said a

390
00:23:09,000 --> 00:23:10,880
minute ago that you agree that the son is also

391
00:23:10,920 --> 00:23:13,000
a co principal with him, so he's not the one principal.

392
00:23:13,799 --> 00:23:16,000
How many principles are how many principles are there?

393
00:23:16,039 --> 00:23:17,599
Speaker 3: We believe there's one principal.

394
00:23:17,759 --> 00:23:20,119
Speaker 1: No you don't. You believe there's one. And you contradicted

395
00:23:20,200 --> 00:23:21,920
by saying that the father and the son together are

396
00:23:21,960 --> 00:23:23,240
a principal. That's two.

397
00:23:23,519 --> 00:23:25,359
Speaker 3: Yeah, that's that's the one principle. It's not gonna be

398
00:23:25,440 --> 00:23:26,119
two principles.

399
00:23:26,160 --> 00:23:28,039
Speaker 1: You just said the father is the principal, and then

400
00:23:28,039 --> 00:23:29,680
you said the father and the son are a principal.

401
00:23:29,720 --> 00:23:32,119
That's two. Can you count the father?

402
00:23:32,200 --> 00:23:36,960
Speaker 3: And what do you this dowel argument?

403
00:23:37,079 --> 00:23:39,039
Speaker 1: Are you this dumb? You don't even know our position?

404
00:23:39,680 --> 00:23:42,799
You said, you said the father is the principal, right.

405
00:23:44,759 --> 00:23:46,759
Speaker 3: The father and the son are the one principal.

406
00:23:47,319 --> 00:23:49,039
Speaker 1: At first you said the father is the principle. I

407
00:23:49,079 --> 00:23:50,960
asked you his hyposthetic property. You said it was to

408
00:23:51,000 --> 00:23:54,400
be the principal. That's just hype. Well yeah, you said that,

409
00:23:54,480 --> 00:23:56,480
don't lie you said that, yeah, no.

410
00:23:56,519 --> 00:23:59,079
Speaker 3: Yeah, yeah, I understand that the father is going to

411
00:23:59,119 --> 00:23:59,799
be the principal.

412
00:24:00,079 --> 00:24:03,720
Speaker 1: Oh, then there you go. Now you contradicted because the

413
00:24:03,720 --> 00:24:06,400
father and the son together are now a principal. That's

414
00:24:06,400 --> 00:24:08,680
the problem. So that's two principles.

415
00:24:09,480 --> 00:24:11,359
Speaker 3: I never negated that the son is a principle.

416
00:24:13,519 --> 00:24:16,480
Speaker 1: If the father is the principle and the son also

417
00:24:16,519 --> 00:24:18,960
with him, is also a principle, that's two.

418
00:24:19,240 --> 00:24:21,480
Speaker 3: Well, I don't know, they're both the same principle.

419
00:24:21,839 --> 00:24:24,119
Speaker 1: Okay, now you're motal. Now you're a modalist because now

420
00:24:24,119 --> 00:24:26,359
you've said the father and the son together are a principle.

421
00:24:26,359 --> 00:24:27,720
That's modalism.

422
00:24:28,039 --> 00:24:28,880
Speaker 3: How does that follow?

423
00:24:29,440 --> 00:24:32,799
Speaker 1: Because that's the argument that the Cappadocians made against the Eunomians.

424
00:24:33,440 --> 00:24:37,039
You're confusing hyposthetic properties with common powers and energies.

425
00:24:39,279 --> 00:24:40,680
Speaker 3: Where are you getting this notion from?

426
00:24:41,680 --> 00:24:43,480
Speaker 1: Have you read Basil on the Holy Spirit? Have you

427
00:24:43,519 --> 00:24:44,799
read Basil against Eunomius?

428
00:24:45,920 --> 00:24:48,799
Speaker 16: Oh, same Basil against sat basilik.

429
00:24:48,440 --> 00:24:51,039
Speaker 1: As what you would be? I thought you knew all

430
00:24:51,039 --> 00:24:56,079
this stuff. You're not familiar with those works Basil on

431
00:24:56,079 --> 00:24:58,839
the Holy Spirit and Basil against Unamias. Have you read those?

432
00:24:59,440 --> 00:25:02,920
I guess amousious don't even know the word what.

433
00:25:05,440 --> 00:25:09,319
Speaker 16: Doesnious anonymious?

434
00:25:09,440 --> 00:25:11,440
Speaker 1: So you're not even familiar with this. You're not familiar

435
00:25:11,480 --> 00:25:14,960
with it? Is you're a clown that because it shows

436
00:25:14,960 --> 00:25:16,839
that you're not familiar with the literature, and you're trying

437
00:25:16,839 --> 00:25:17,440
to debate it.

438
00:25:17,680 --> 00:25:19,440
Speaker 3: Why that's not true?

439
00:25:19,920 --> 00:25:23,960
Speaker 1: True, you don't know the terms. You're demonstrating your ignorance

440
00:25:24,000 --> 00:25:25,119
of the whole scope of this.

441
00:25:25,880 --> 00:25:27,799
Speaker 3: Oh, because I pronounce wrong?

442
00:25:28,839 --> 00:25:30,680
Speaker 1: No, it means that you're not familiar with the literature.

443
00:25:30,680 --> 00:25:32,319
You couldn't even tell me two of the works.

444
00:25:32,839 --> 00:25:33,880
Speaker 7: This is no.

445
00:25:34,160 --> 00:25:36,559
Speaker 1: No, have you read this? Have you read this literature?

446
00:25:39,480 --> 00:25:40,599
Have you read this literature?

447
00:25:42,759 --> 00:25:42,880
Speaker 6: Uh?

448
00:25:43,240 --> 00:25:43,839
Speaker 3: The literature?

449
00:25:43,920 --> 00:25:46,559
Speaker 16: Onsous?

450
00:25:47,759 --> 00:25:49,480
Speaker 3: Why does that matter? Can you show me where?

451
00:25:49,599 --> 00:25:51,960
Speaker 1: Because it shows that you don't. It shows that you're

452
00:25:52,000 --> 00:25:53,680
not familiar with the topic. You don't know to pronounce

453
00:25:53,720 --> 00:26:00,640
the basic terms, right. No, No, you're about to cry, dude, Like, Look,

454
00:26:00,640 --> 00:26:03,240
it would be whove you to go and understand this

455
00:26:03,279 --> 00:26:05,319
stuff before you try to debate it. And you did

456
00:26:05,359 --> 00:26:06,039
come here to debate.

457
00:26:07,119 --> 00:26:10,839
Speaker 3: Can you please just show me where? Saint Basil against.

458
00:26:11,519 --> 00:26:13,680
Speaker 1: Who's the who's the soul cause? Who do they argue

459
00:26:13,720 --> 00:26:14,440
is the sole cause?

460
00:26:16,279 --> 00:26:18,119
Speaker 3: The soul cause? What do you mean by soul cause?

461
00:26:18,200 --> 00:26:21,079
Speaker 1: So you're not, again, not familiar with common terminology throughout

462
00:26:21,119 --> 00:26:25,559
all the cappadotions. Soul cause, soul cause, Father is the

463
00:26:25,599 --> 00:26:30,799
sole cause, the Cappidotion dictum. Shut up, shut up, all right,

464
00:26:30,880 --> 00:26:32,200
you're gone.

465
00:26:33,680 --> 00:26:34,000
Speaker 3: Running.

466
00:26:34,119 --> 00:26:36,079
Speaker 1: No, you made it a fool of yourself. I'm not

467
00:26:36,160 --> 00:26:38,680
running from you. You have no idea what you're talking about.

468
00:26:40,680 --> 00:26:42,880
I'm trying to explain it to you. You won't shut up,

469
00:26:42,920 --> 00:26:43,960
Shut up, and I'll tell you.

470
00:26:44,960 --> 00:26:45,440
Speaker 3: That's fine.

471
00:26:46,119 --> 00:26:49,440
Speaker 1: Sole cause their dictum is anything that is a hypostatic

472
00:26:49,519 --> 00:26:54,000
property is unique to the person's and non communicable or shareable.

473
00:26:54,759 --> 00:26:57,559
Anything that is not a hypostatic property is common to

474
00:26:57,680 --> 00:27:01,000
all three. That's a cappadoc dictum. That's why the Philioko

475
00:27:01,079 --> 00:27:04,400
is wrong, according to the Cappadocians, because the father's principle

476
00:27:04,759 --> 00:27:08,599
what picks him out his hypostatic property is to be

477
00:27:09,359 --> 00:27:14,960
soul s o l e cause rka fount principle. Yea,

478
00:27:16,240 --> 00:27:18,880
all it does because it means that what he has

479
00:27:18,960 --> 00:27:24,640
that marks him out cannot be shared. That's the Cappadocian dictum.

480
00:27:24,759 --> 00:27:27,279
Speaker 3: Well, yeah, well, the thing that marks them.

481
00:27:27,119 --> 00:27:32,559
Speaker 1: Out is no, it does not relation itself. Is a predicate,

482
00:27:32,720 --> 00:27:38,160
not a subject. Persons are subjects, not relations. Yeah, but

483
00:27:38,200 --> 00:27:41,480
that's so you would know that if you've read the Cappadocians,

484
00:27:41,519 --> 00:27:43,079
So you have no knowledge of this topic, and you're

485
00:27:43,119 --> 00:27:47,519
trying to debate what does persona at rola mean?

486
00:27:49,400 --> 00:27:51,440
Speaker 3: Oh? Now he wants Now he wants to speak Greek.

487
00:27:52,759 --> 00:28:00,359
Speaker 1: Persona at rolatio's Latin, you idiot. Oh and I don't

488
00:28:00,359 --> 00:28:02,759
know Latin. I don't care about Latin. But this guy

489
00:28:02,839 --> 00:28:06,359
just showed a. This is the arrogance of these people,

490
00:28:06,559 --> 00:28:08,680
no knowledge of these topics. They want to debate it.

491
00:28:08,720 --> 00:28:12,319
Persona at rolatio is aquinas is dictum, person is relation.

492
00:28:13,240 --> 00:28:15,839
So the first person to say that is that I'm

493
00:28:15,880 --> 00:28:19,680
aware of is perhaps Augustine, but at least for sure aquinas.

494
00:28:23,920 --> 00:28:28,079
I'm looking for people who disagree. Dank, It's about to

495
00:28:28,119 --> 00:28:33,359
get smoky up in here. The Greek dictum persona at rolatio.

496
00:28:34,119 --> 00:28:38,839
Oh hell, Hellulu.

497
00:28:40,480 --> 00:28:41,400
Speaker 3: Is too there?

498
00:28:41,480 --> 00:28:42,839
Speaker 1: Can you yep?

499
00:28:44,000 --> 00:28:44,400
Speaker 3: Hi about?

500
00:28:44,400 --> 00:28:44,839
Speaker 7: How are you doing?

501
00:28:47,519 --> 00:28:48,920
Speaker 1: I'm here? What's up?

502
00:28:50,759 --> 00:28:54,759
Speaker 6: I just wanted to talk about you with the Exodus?

503
00:28:54,799 --> 00:28:55,599
Speaker 19: Are you familiar with it?

504
00:28:55,680 --> 00:28:56,799
Speaker 7: To the Old Testaments?

505
00:28:58,160 --> 00:28:59,440
Speaker 1: I've never read at what's it about?

506
00:29:01,279 --> 00:29:01,680
Speaker 7: Well?

507
00:29:01,720 --> 00:29:06,240
Speaker 18: I only know a few quotes from it, and I

508
00:29:06,240 --> 00:29:07,319
wanted to debate you about it.

509
00:29:07,559 --> 00:29:11,559
Speaker 7: I personally I don't identify with any religion. I would

510
00:29:11,599 --> 00:29:14,000
say maybe agnostic.

511
00:29:15,000 --> 00:29:18,039
Speaker 1: How about we debate agnosticism.

512
00:29:18,559 --> 00:29:21,160
Speaker 7: We can debate agnosticism. Sure, I just wanted to ask

513
00:29:21,200 --> 00:29:24,440
you your stance on for example, Exodus twenty one seven.

514
00:29:24,559 --> 00:29:30,400
Speaker 3: I don't know if you're familiar with it, let me

515
00:29:30,400 --> 00:29:30,880
pull it up.

516
00:29:31,920 --> 00:29:38,680
Speaker 7: Sure, sure, sure, sure, yeah sure. Also I'm really a

517
00:29:38,720 --> 00:29:39,680
beginner to all of this.

518
00:29:41,319 --> 00:29:47,519
Speaker 8: So I arse right, yeah, you know what.

519
00:29:47,559 --> 00:29:50,279
Speaker 1: I don't even just the laugh is already that I

520
00:29:50,319 --> 00:29:51,680
don't do, the condescending laugh.

521
00:29:52,000 --> 00:29:53,720
Speaker 7: So whoa what do you mean?

522
00:29:54,480 --> 00:29:57,400
Speaker 1: I can't do it? That's my number one pat peeve

523
00:29:57,519 --> 00:29:59,480
is that condescending laugh? And if you repeat my name

524
00:29:59,480 --> 00:30:02,880
over never never Ryan so Exous twenty one seven. If

525
00:30:02,880 --> 00:30:05,960
a man sells his daughter to be a slave, she

526
00:30:06,039 --> 00:30:08,720
shall not go out as the male slaves do so.

527
00:30:08,920 --> 00:30:12,680
At a time when there were people as property, this

528
00:30:12,720 --> 00:30:15,240
is putting stricters on what you can do with humans

529
00:30:15,240 --> 00:30:19,200
that you have as property. And this is a unique

530
00:30:20,640 --> 00:30:25,400
revolutionary principle in the ancient world to introduce the ideas

531
00:30:25,480 --> 00:30:29,160
that slaves have rights, have dignity, and they cannot be abused.

532
00:30:29,200 --> 00:30:32,599
And you'll find that all throughout mosaic law. So I

533
00:30:32,599 --> 00:30:35,039
don't like, don't waste my time with this stupid Reddit

534
00:30:35,119 --> 00:30:39,200
level stuff of how God's a evil, mean person or something. Ryan,

535
00:30:39,200 --> 00:30:42,160
what's up, hey, J can you hear me? Yep?

536
00:30:43,519 --> 00:30:43,799
Speaker 3: Cool.

537
00:30:44,480 --> 00:30:48,759
Speaker 20: So I'm a relatively new Christian. I've been attending a

538
00:30:49,200 --> 00:30:53,000
reform Baptist church. This was before I really knew anything

539
00:30:53,039 --> 00:30:58,559
about reform theology, specifically Calvinism, and since I've actually been

540
00:30:59,039 --> 00:31:03,960
turning away from Symtism in exploring Orthodoxy. But something that

541
00:31:04,039 --> 00:31:09,359
within Calvinism that was appealing to me or something that

542
00:31:09,400 --> 00:31:14,240
made sense, was this idea of God's total sovereignty. And

543
00:31:14,880 --> 00:31:21,079
I'm wondering from an Orthodox perspective, how you would square

544
00:31:21,160 --> 00:31:27,039
God's sovereignty with you know, with man's free will or

545
00:31:27,200 --> 00:31:29,640
or you know, versus like Christ Timothy two four, where

546
00:31:29,680 --> 00:31:31,319
God desires all people to be saved.

547
00:31:31,359 --> 00:31:35,920
Speaker 1: Yeah. So I've done multiple talks critiquing Calvinism at great

548
00:31:36,200 --> 00:31:38,680
lengths for multiple hours, so you can go watch those.

549
00:31:41,519 --> 00:31:43,599
I'm not trying to be rude, but like, it's just

550
00:31:43,680 --> 00:31:53,839
not like I can't enter into that whole repeat discussion again, Seth.

551
00:32:03,440 --> 00:32:05,839
There's a two part series on my Cliff channel critique

552
00:32:05,839 --> 00:32:09,640
and Calvinism. There's a whole thing on Sam Chimun's channel

553
00:32:09,640 --> 00:32:12,000
critique and Calvinism. There's a whole thing on David Patrick

554
00:32:12,000 --> 00:32:15,400
Carrey Cotel's channel critique and calvinism. So, guys, most of

555
00:32:15,440 --> 00:32:17,720
these kinds of questions I don't mind them. I look

556
00:32:17,759 --> 00:32:19,720
for people who disagree. I want a debate. But when

557
00:32:19,759 --> 00:32:22,119
you ask me, what's your opinion on PSA, how do

558
00:32:22,160 --> 00:32:26,599
you refute calvinism and predestination and sovereign grace? Like, dude,

559
00:32:26,640 --> 00:32:31,079
there's a million live streams where we have addressed this

560
00:32:32,720 --> 00:32:36,319
countless times. I just can't repeat the same argument for

561
00:32:36,400 --> 00:32:40,960
the thousandth time and go through the whole shabang again. Matt,

562
00:32:41,039 --> 00:32:48,720
what's up? People are saying, turn on super chouts on

563
00:32:48,759 --> 00:32:53,079
your channel. Bro, use stream labs. I got demonetized in

564
00:32:53,160 --> 00:32:56,160
twenty eighteen. There's no super chats on my channel. That's

565
00:32:56,200 --> 00:32:59,119
why you use stream labs. Right here, go to stream

566
00:32:59,200 --> 00:33:04,200
labs and feel free. Twitter tonight is like TikTok used

567
00:33:04,200 --> 00:33:07,079
to be. TikTok used to be like just the most

568
00:33:08,240 --> 00:33:13,039
just brain to just drive you insane level of debating.

569
00:33:13,039 --> 00:33:19,839
What's up, Mankja. Yeah.

570
00:33:20,000 --> 00:33:22,799
Speaker 21: So, one thing that I've heard from Orthodox as far

571
00:33:22,839 --> 00:33:27,400
as veneration of icons is that the ability to venery

572
00:33:27,640 --> 00:33:33,160
icons occurs through the incarnation of Christ. But at the

573
00:33:33,160 --> 00:33:36,519
same time, I'm looking at some of the stuff around,

574
00:33:37,480 --> 00:33:41,079
like Christ's existence before, So looking at like the hymn

575
00:33:41,200 --> 00:33:45,079
of where it says like the that shall kiss the

576
00:33:45,079 --> 00:33:45,519
feet of.

577
00:33:45,440 --> 00:33:50,200
Speaker 3: Those who tried in Eden. So just trying to understand, like.

578
00:33:50,319 --> 00:33:54,160
Speaker 21: Where is there what what's the reasoning behind that delineation.

579
00:33:55,519 --> 00:33:57,000
Speaker 1: Hymn of what? I don't know what you're talking about?

580
00:33:57,000 --> 00:34:02,200
Speaker 21: I'm sorry, what understanding is? It gets sung on on

581
00:34:02,680 --> 00:34:04,119
Holy Wednesday?

582
00:34:04,759 --> 00:34:05,400
Speaker 1: And what now?

583
00:34:06,799 --> 00:34:07,079
Speaker 22: Uh?

584
00:34:07,839 --> 00:34:11,239
Speaker 21: Just talking about the the presence of Christ's physical body

585
00:34:11,320 --> 00:34:12,599
before his incarnation?

586
00:34:14,960 --> 00:34:16,519
Speaker 1: How could he have a what? I don't know what

587
00:34:16,559 --> 00:34:20,480
that means? The presence of his physical body before the incarnation? Sure,

588
00:34:20,559 --> 00:34:23,440
so like what are you talking about?

589
00:34:23,840 --> 00:34:24,639
Speaker 3: Yeah, I guess it would.

590
00:34:25,000 --> 00:34:27,639
Speaker 21: It's hard, That's what Maybe where I'm trying to understand

591
00:34:27,639 --> 00:34:30,639
of Like is this a theophany or it's talking about

592
00:34:30,679 --> 00:34:33,440
like a as far as I understand, like the icon

593
00:34:33,480 --> 00:34:37,719
of Christ, where it's uh him making Adam Adam has

594
00:34:37,760 --> 00:34:40,440
the same body as as Christ does.

595
00:34:40,559 --> 00:34:46,920
Speaker 1: Essentially, Yeah, Adam is created after the prototype, after the

596
00:34:46,960 --> 00:34:48,000
pattern of Christ.

597
00:34:49,360 --> 00:34:51,760
Speaker 21: Right, So I guess in that case, where is it

598
00:34:51,840 --> 00:34:55,079
Like why would icons not be Okay? Then before the

599
00:34:55,119 --> 00:34:58,199
incarnation or is it just based on the that the

600
00:34:58,239 --> 00:34:59,119
incarnation happens.

601
00:34:59,159 --> 00:35:01,800
Speaker 1: I mean, there are any of types of icons prior

602
00:35:01,840 --> 00:35:03,360
to the incarnation, So I don't know what you mean.

603
00:35:03,639 --> 00:35:06,280
I mean, when you read the Bible and it describes

604
00:35:06,360 --> 00:35:12,360
through written texts and sentences theophanies, those are created symbols

605
00:35:12,360 --> 00:35:17,519
that are referring to theophanies. And the Torah itself is

606
00:35:17,559 --> 00:35:22,119
a holy book. The Temple had all kinds of images.

607
00:35:22,159 --> 00:35:24,320
The arc is a kind of a icon.

608
00:35:25,719 --> 00:35:28,880
Speaker 21: Yeah, I guess, I mean specifically of God versus of

609
00:35:30,000 --> 00:35:30,679
holy things.

610
00:35:30,760 --> 00:35:32,639
Speaker 3: And maybe there's not a good reason.

611
00:35:32,360 --> 00:35:34,360
Speaker 1: To do well. The reason according to like when this

612
00:35:34,400 --> 00:35:36,599
comes up at the time of the seventh that Cumunical Council,

613
00:35:36,639 --> 00:35:38,880
the reasoning is that the incarnation hadn't happened yet.

614
00:35:40,599 --> 00:35:42,800
Speaker 21: Yeah, it's so maybe that's where I'm trying to draw

615
00:35:42,880 --> 00:35:48,719
the distinction of though the incarnation hadn't happened. Maybe this

616
00:35:48,800 --> 00:35:51,760
is where I'm getting the confusion. Like, so we're saying

617
00:35:51,840 --> 00:35:56,440
Theophanes before, even though it's the incarnation's the moment of

618
00:35:56,519 --> 00:35:59,840
those that same body being recognized in the past.

619
00:36:01,199 --> 00:36:04,599
Speaker 1: No, I'm not sure that that is the case, because

620
00:36:04,639 --> 00:36:08,599
there's not just Theophanes that are quote body. I mean,

621
00:36:08,639 --> 00:36:13,559
there's Theophanes that are the form of the cloud, the fire.

622
00:36:13,760 --> 00:36:18,480
I mean, it's not just a you know, man like

623
00:36:18,559 --> 00:36:22,840
image like the wrestling with the Jacob, russels with the Angel.

624
00:36:25,280 --> 00:36:25,440
Speaker 19: Yeah.

625
00:36:25,519 --> 00:36:27,519
Speaker 1: So in other words, we can't say that it's Christ's

626
00:36:27,679 --> 00:36:32,800
human body back in time or something like that, at

627
00:36:32,880 --> 00:36:33,800
least not in all of them.

628
00:36:35,079 --> 00:36:38,119
Speaker 21: I've heard from a variety of sources that it's like that.

629
00:36:38,159 --> 00:36:41,360
The concept is that it is Christ's human body, because

630
00:36:41,400 --> 00:36:42,599
God exists outside of.

631
00:36:42,960 --> 00:36:43,320
Speaker 8: Time, right.

632
00:36:43,400 --> 00:36:45,559
Speaker 1: So I'm aware of this, and I think Bishop Irena

633
00:36:45,840 --> 00:36:49,159
has the opinion that you could say that the prototype

634
00:36:49,239 --> 00:36:52,639
is the deified, out of time, resurrected flesh of Christ.

635
00:36:52,679 --> 00:36:54,360
I'm aware of all that. But I'm making a different point,

636
00:36:54,400 --> 00:36:56,559
which is that that's not the only theophany that we

637
00:36:56,599 --> 00:36:58,880
see in the Old Testament. We see the cloud, we

638
00:36:58,960 --> 00:37:01,119
see the fire, we see all that kind of stuff

639
00:37:01,119 --> 00:37:03,320
which is not a body. I mean, it's not a physical,

640
00:37:03,639 --> 00:37:06,960
not a manlike body. So the theophonies are mysteries. We

641
00:37:07,039 --> 00:37:08,599
don't know how God does that.

642
00:37:09,679 --> 00:37:10,719
Speaker 3: No, I can understand that.

643
00:37:10,840 --> 00:37:13,360
Speaker 21: It's more just trying to understand how the argumentation then

644
00:37:13,400 --> 00:37:18,559
goes of of if the glorified body is recognized before

645
00:37:18,599 --> 00:37:19,199
the incarnation.

646
00:37:19,239 --> 00:37:21,800
Speaker 1: Well, I'm not. I don't. I've never I've never argued that.

647
00:37:23,000 --> 00:37:27,079
Speaker 21: Okay, yeah, some so it's some argue. But maybe that's

648
00:37:27,119 --> 00:37:27,760
not your line.

649
00:37:28,280 --> 00:37:30,119
Speaker 1: That's not my line of reasoning because I don't think

650
00:37:30,159 --> 00:37:33,440
it's it's intended to solve this question. And if you

651
00:37:33,559 --> 00:37:36,719
if I bring in cloud and fire, it doesn't solve

652
00:37:36,719 --> 00:37:37,079
a question.

653
00:37:37,440 --> 00:37:49,599
Speaker 21: So Okay, No, that's helpful, thanks.

654
00:37:46,320 --> 00:37:48,840
Speaker 1: Fair question. And I'm not trying to be dismissive. I

655
00:37:48,920 --> 00:37:50,960
just I don't. I don't know. I mean, I think

656
00:37:51,000 --> 00:37:54,920
there's when we get into these mysteries like that, I

657
00:37:54,920 --> 00:37:58,119
think there's limitations of like what we do and don't

658
00:37:58,119 --> 00:38:10,000
know you know, Oh my gosh, Okay.

659
00:38:10,679 --> 00:38:13,800
Speaker 3: Hey, j Yeah, how's it going?

660
00:38:13,880 --> 00:38:14,079
Speaker 22: Hey?

661
00:38:14,480 --> 00:38:15,960
Speaker 23: I just want to ask, why do you think the

662
00:38:15,960 --> 00:38:17,039
Holy Spirit is God?

663
00:38:18,320 --> 00:38:21,800
Speaker 1: Because he's all throughout the Old Testament as a personal being,

664
00:38:21,840 --> 00:38:24,679
and he's all throughout the New Testament John fourteen, fifteen, sixteen,

665
00:38:24,679 --> 00:38:27,760
et cetera, and acts and the epistles as a personal being.

666
00:38:29,079 --> 00:38:30,880
Speaker 23: Well, I think that he could be a being that

667
00:38:30,960 --> 00:38:31,559
I don't think.

668
00:38:31,400 --> 00:38:32,000
Speaker 3: That he's God.

669
00:38:32,239 --> 00:38:34,679
Speaker 1: Well, I mean he's called God, and.

670
00:38:34,719 --> 00:38:35,440
Speaker 3: Where would that be.

671
00:38:48,039 --> 00:38:51,039
Speaker 22: See my position is that Jesus and the Father of God,

672
00:38:52,159 --> 00:38:53,840
but the Holy Spirit cannot be goped.

673
00:38:54,440 --> 00:39:06,599
Speaker 24: So there's about i'd say one, two, three, four, six, ten, eleven, twelve, thirteen, fourteen, fifteen, sixteen, seventeen,

674
00:39:06,599 --> 00:39:07,880
eighteen twenty, it's.

675
00:39:07,800 --> 00:39:14,800
Speaker 1: About twenty two three, about twenty five passages throughout the

676
00:39:14,800 --> 00:39:18,199
Old Testament that refer to him as Yahweh and as God.

677
00:39:18,400 --> 00:39:20,519
Speaker 25: Well, look whatever you and the Roman Catholic teach, I

678
00:39:20,519 --> 00:39:21,079
don't accept.

679
00:39:21,119 --> 00:39:23,559
Speaker 1: I don't care that. I mean, I just list you

680
00:39:23,559 --> 00:39:25,400
wanted the passages you want to go through one by

681
00:39:25,440 --> 00:39:27,840
one or what? Oh he ran away? So there you go,

682
00:39:28,960 --> 00:39:33,159
Biblical benitarianism. So lunatic heretic who doesn't want to go

683
00:39:33,199 --> 00:39:36,239
through twenty five passages I have right here in front

684
00:39:36,239 --> 00:39:38,719
of me that refer to in the Old Testament the

685
00:39:38,719 --> 00:39:40,840
deity of the Holy Spirit and that he is Yeahweh.

686
00:39:40,880 --> 00:39:47,320
And so what do you do? He ran And for

687
00:39:47,360 --> 00:39:49,880
those that would like those passages here, okay, do you're

688
00:39:49,920 --> 00:39:55,639
right here? Almost all these are Old Testament references. So

689
00:39:55,679 --> 00:39:56,159
here you go.

690
00:40:00,000 --> 00:40:02,360
Speaker 26: If you want to, you can screenshot that. There is

691
00:40:02,639 --> 00:40:08,199
at least twenty five references right there too. The full

692
00:40:08,320 --> 00:40:12,119
deity in personhood of the Holy Spirit. And once you

693
00:40:13,280 --> 00:40:16,119
have this ready to go, what a heretics do?

694
00:40:16,159 --> 00:40:21,760
Speaker 1: They run? So we're looking tonight. I know a lot

695
00:40:21,800 --> 00:40:23,960
of you guys want to bring Orthodox questions. I'm looking

696
00:40:23,960 --> 00:40:27,519
for people who disagree. You know a lot of people

697
00:40:27,519 --> 00:40:31,039
want to come get their FAQ questions answered. They don't

698
00:40:31,039 --> 00:40:33,000
want to read the books. They want to be lazy guys.

699
00:40:33,079 --> 00:40:36,719
Go to the church. Go get catechized in the church.

700
00:40:37,000 --> 00:40:42,639
I'm not your catechizer. I'm an Internet clown. So don't

701
00:40:42,639 --> 00:40:47,400
come to me for catechistis find an Orthodox church and

702
00:40:47,519 --> 00:41:01,840
do that. And now this guy wants to come back,

703
00:41:02,719 --> 00:41:09,199
so it's a waste of time. You'll notice that none

704
00:41:09,239 --> 00:41:20,159
of the Protestants showed up. Interesting I message. I'll see one, two, three, four, five, six, seven,

705
00:41:20,639 --> 00:41:26,000
eight Protestants today. That's d MS. I'm not I don't

706
00:41:26,039 --> 00:41:27,800
know a lot about old believers. Man, that's not your

707
00:41:27,840 --> 00:41:32,679
that's not my I'm sorry, man, it's just not I'm

708
00:41:32,679 --> 00:41:35,800
not a historian on old believers, and that's not my domain.

709
00:41:36,960 --> 00:41:59,800
In Schultz, go ahead, I'm you. If we're going keep

710
00:41:59,800 --> 00:42:01,519
it budget, why won't you debate?

711
00:42:01,519 --> 00:42:01,760
Speaker 8: Budge?

712
00:42:02,840 --> 00:42:05,559
Speaker 1: So I've sent multiple dms to voice of reason. I

713
00:42:05,559 --> 00:42:08,639
don't know if he just ignores dms, but why does it?

714
00:42:08,719 --> 00:42:08,840
Speaker 7: Right?

715
00:42:09,239 --> 00:42:11,960
Speaker 19: Yeah, go ahead, I'm sorry, Yeah, I have a question.

716
00:42:12,119 --> 00:42:16,519
Speaker 27: I'm I'm currently considering orthodox I want to argue against

717
00:42:17,239 --> 00:42:17,880
my friends.

718
00:42:18,039 --> 00:42:20,920
Speaker 3: One of my friends has an argument for logic.

719
00:42:21,039 --> 00:42:24,599
Speaker 27: He says that logic just is an abstraction of the

720
00:42:24,639 --> 00:42:27,840
physical So what is the argument you would use to

721
00:42:28,480 --> 00:42:29,559
kind of dismantle that?

722
00:42:29,719 --> 00:42:32,360
Speaker 1: And well, that's an assertion, that's an assertion. Just saying

723
00:42:32,360 --> 00:42:35,000
it just is an abstraction really doesn't tell us anything.

724
00:42:35,639 --> 00:42:37,360
How does he know that? And what does it mean

725
00:42:37,400 --> 00:42:38,960
to say that it's an abstract? Does it mean that

726
00:42:39,000 --> 00:42:43,079
it has an actual ontological status? Does it is an

727
00:42:43,079 --> 00:42:46,559
invariant over time? Does it change? I mean, like that

728
00:42:46,599 --> 00:42:51,400
doesn't really tell us anything. That's an assertion, And how

729
00:42:51,440 --> 00:42:55,039
does that work? Like how do you abstract something from

730
00:42:55,480 --> 00:43:00,639
molecules that you're saying is somehow an invariant? Imaatey real law?

731
00:43:01,079 --> 00:43:01,599
Is it law?

732
00:43:01,800 --> 00:43:01,880
Speaker 7: Like?

733
00:43:02,360 --> 00:43:06,000
Speaker 1: How is something law? Like if matter is always in motion?

734
00:43:07,480 --> 00:43:09,480
Speaker 27: Well, I think the argument he would say is that

735
00:43:10,159 --> 00:43:14,079
there's the laws of physics, except it derives from that,

736
00:43:14,280 --> 00:43:14,920
Like it's just a.

737
00:43:15,039 --> 00:43:17,440
Speaker 1: Yeah, But saying that it derives from. It is not

738
00:43:17,559 --> 00:43:20,000
answering what the law is and how does he know

739
00:43:20,079 --> 00:43:22,800
that it's a law? Is it universal on what basis?

740
00:43:24,199 --> 00:43:27,039
So you can't when people are doing this kind of stuff,

741
00:43:27,079 --> 00:43:29,559
and when you're debating with people, you can't let them

742
00:43:29,599 --> 00:43:32,800
get away with assertions. Everybody wants to debate, and I'm

743
00:43:32,840 --> 00:43:34,639
an experienced debater. I don't care if you hate me

744
00:43:34,760 --> 00:43:36,360
or not. Like I am an experienced debater. I've been

745
00:43:36,360 --> 00:43:40,719
debating since age nineteen and that was I don't know,

746
00:43:40,920 --> 00:43:44,320
a long time ago. So people in debates they want

747
00:43:44,320 --> 00:43:47,559
to assert positions and move and blow past it. But

748
00:43:47,639 --> 00:43:50,400
you got to as a debater, be like, wait a minute,

749
00:43:50,559 --> 00:43:53,079
that's an assertion. You're just saying that it is this

750
00:43:53,519 --> 00:43:57,320
like you're some sort of dogmatic pronunciation from the papal

751
00:43:57,360 --> 00:44:00,320
throne of logic or something. What is that mean? How

752
00:44:00,320 --> 00:44:02,800
do we know that that's the case. What's your justification

753
00:44:02,880 --> 00:44:06,400
for the desertion? Those are metaphysical claims. Logic just is

754
00:44:06,440 --> 00:44:10,159
an abstraction from federal called objects. That doesn't tell us

755
00:44:10,199 --> 00:44:12,760
how you got to that step, what that is, what

756
00:44:12,800 --> 00:44:15,519
the justification for it is, how it is? It's just

757
00:44:15,559 --> 00:44:19,440
an assertion, what just happened?

758
00:44:19,559 --> 00:44:20,039
Speaker 3: Nice one?

759
00:44:21,440 --> 00:44:25,000
Speaker 1: Hello, Yeah, man, I'm sorry. I'm not gonna repeat all that.

760
00:44:25,039 --> 00:44:27,840
You can go back and rewind or something. Not repeating

761
00:44:27,840 --> 00:44:28,159
all that.

762
00:44:30,960 --> 00:44:35,599
Speaker 22: I love how atheists they just stay there like it's

763
00:44:35,679 --> 00:44:36,719
just like we all know.

764
00:44:37,000 --> 00:44:37,679
Speaker 19: We all know this.

765
00:44:38,079 --> 00:44:41,760
Speaker 1: Yeah, it's abundantly clear that this is the case. Even

766
00:44:41,800 --> 00:44:43,840
though it's like the most highly debated thing ever.

767
00:44:44,320 --> 00:44:48,320
Speaker 28: Its little abundantly clearer. All rational people believe in my position.

768
00:44:51,239 --> 00:44:58,000
Go ahead, Well, I don't know. I thought there was

769
00:44:58,039 --> 00:44:59,719
a dude here. Well you're you're free to go ahead

770
00:44:59,719 --> 00:45:00,840
as well. Well if you want to.

771
00:45:02,119 --> 00:45:05,920
Speaker 1: I'm free, yes, free to do what I wow any

772
00:45:05,920 --> 00:45:06,599
old time.

773
00:45:07,320 --> 00:45:11,119
Speaker 29: It's just so stupid because like most people see on here,

774
00:45:11,239 --> 00:45:15,079
they're not even familiar with the literature that like, first

775
00:45:15,119 --> 00:45:17,639
of all, you can't reduce.

776
00:45:18,800 --> 00:45:21,960
Speaker 3: Suppose you weren't a platonic realist or something like.

777
00:45:21,880 --> 00:45:24,840
Speaker 29: That, where or like like a position like ours that

778
00:45:24,880 --> 00:45:28,039
they're actually transcendent laws of logic and stuff like let's

779
00:45:28,079 --> 00:45:30,280
say you're oristitos conceptualist.

780
00:45:32,719 --> 00:45:39,119
Speaker 22: It's still objective and you can't reduce. What's so funny

781
00:45:39,199 --> 00:45:42,000
is that categorically it just doesn't even make sense.

782
00:45:42,239 --> 00:45:46,440
Speaker 3: Universals are not particulars. So there's no way that you

783
00:45:46,519 --> 00:45:47,719
can actually.

784
00:45:48,639 --> 00:45:53,360
Speaker 30: Take particulars and make, you know, and reduce it, sorry,

785
00:45:53,480 --> 00:45:57,519
take abstractions, diversals and just say, well, it's identical to

786
00:45:57,559 --> 00:45:58,599
the opposite thing that.

787
00:45:58,599 --> 00:46:02,519
Speaker 1: It is exactly. It's just like it's nonsensical just by

788
00:46:02,519 --> 00:46:07,280
the meaning of the words, right. It's like that Roman

789
00:46:07,320 --> 00:46:09,880
Catholic guy that was in here saying that created grace

790
00:46:10,079 --> 00:46:11,639
is uncreated.

791
00:46:13,920 --> 00:46:15,800
Speaker 3: Usurper the creature.

792
00:46:16,400 --> 00:46:19,280
Speaker 1: Yeah, created Grace is a creature, but it's God. So

793
00:46:19,320 --> 00:46:20,559
there's a created God.

794
00:46:21,320 --> 00:46:23,599
Speaker 3: But by the way, check out.

795
00:46:24,079 --> 00:46:29,000
Speaker 1: E Polamists are polytheists, but there's created God.

796
00:46:31,920 --> 00:46:33,280
Speaker 3: It's a good argument against them.

797
00:46:33,320 --> 00:46:35,119
Speaker 1: Actually, what's up?

798
00:46:37,440 --> 00:46:37,679
Speaker 3: Herry?

799
00:46:37,719 --> 00:46:38,079
Speaker 31: What was up?

800
00:46:38,159 --> 00:46:38,320
Speaker 7: Jay?

801
00:46:38,880 --> 00:46:43,519
Speaker 18: So so generally speaks not for so much a Protestant

802
00:46:43,599 --> 00:46:48,440
question per se, but I just wanted to ask in terms.

803
00:46:48,199 --> 00:46:55,360
Speaker 32: Of the the the liturgical tradition of the Orthodox Church,

804
00:46:55,400 --> 00:47:00,159
if that's something you're into, uh.

805
00:47:00,079 --> 00:47:03,440
Speaker 1: Uh yeah, I mean I am somewhat. I'm not a

806
00:47:03,480 --> 00:47:10,239
liturgical scholar, but I'm interested in Orthodox liturgy right right.

807
00:47:10,280 --> 00:47:12,679
Speaker 18: So it's just so it's just curious. I mean, if

808
00:47:12,719 --> 00:47:15,920
you won't, well you say you know so much school,

809
00:47:16,679 --> 00:47:20,280
but I wanted to know about how it's musical tradition

810
00:47:20,719 --> 00:47:26,079
sort of developed distinctly through the sort of Gregorian Chian system,

811
00:47:26,119 --> 00:47:27,480
which the.

812
00:47:27,480 --> 00:47:32,840
Speaker 1: Music, Yeah that I don't know much about. You could. Uh,

813
00:47:34,519 --> 00:47:36,960
there's a guy on here named Pano. Pano is a

814
00:47:37,039 --> 00:47:42,400
chanter and knows a lot about Orthodox musical history. He

815
00:47:42,440 --> 00:47:59,239
would know a lot more than me. Joe, God's forgive

816
00:47:59,280 --> 00:48:02,000
me five dollars. You of low gain on your microphone. Well,

817
00:48:02,039 --> 00:48:04,119
I'll try to turn it down because the last time

818
00:48:04,159 --> 00:48:06,719
when we were traveling down here, it got jacked all

819
00:48:06,719 --> 00:48:08,480
the way up in the last live stream, which was

820
00:48:08,519 --> 00:48:10,800
a fun live stream, it got all all out of

821
00:48:10,800 --> 00:48:12,599
whack and it sounded like crap. So I turned it

822
00:48:12,639 --> 00:48:14,800
way down, but I tried to get it in the

823
00:48:15,440 --> 00:48:17,719
mid zone. So it doesn't my Does the audio sound

824
00:48:17,719 --> 00:48:20,880
better tonight? Is it right? Do I need to do

825
00:48:21,039 --> 00:48:24,320
a little different? Verrilla? The second ten dollars give us

826
00:48:24,360 --> 00:48:29,559
an impression of a MAGA influencer chick who's like, look

827
00:48:29,599 --> 00:48:34,000
at my boobies. I love trumpling at my babies. How's that?

828
00:48:34,559 --> 00:48:37,639
Is that what you wanted? Strange and bizarre at three dollars.

829
00:48:37,880 --> 00:48:41,800
Don't call them Calvinists, just call them heretics jumble one

830
00:48:41,800 --> 00:48:46,639
of four dollars. Manifest manifects your dreams. Dog. Hey, if

831
00:48:46,679 --> 00:48:48,840
you got the one ring, you can manifest your dreams.

832
00:48:48,840 --> 00:48:51,559
What's up, Joe, you want to talk? I'm you.

833
00:48:52,840 --> 00:48:56,840
Speaker 3: I'm hey Jay. I'm kind of a new listener.

834
00:48:56,880 --> 00:49:00,519
Speaker 33: So I just had a question for you, uh, in

835
00:49:00,599 --> 00:49:03,239
terms of the Western Right Orthodox Church. I know this

836
00:49:03,320 --> 00:49:06,800
isn't necessarily a Protestant or versus Catholic debate, but my

837
00:49:06,920 --> 00:49:09,559
question for you is online the Western Right Church, I

838
00:49:09,559 --> 00:49:13,320
think it's I wouldn't say demonized, but some people argue

839
00:49:13,320 --> 00:49:16,639
that it's the bridge between the Catholic Church and the

840
00:49:17,119 --> 00:49:19,360
fullness of the faith of the Eastern Orthodox Church. So

841
00:49:19,400 --> 00:49:23,239
do you think the Western Right Church is the fullness

842
00:49:23,280 --> 00:49:25,159
of the truth or do you think it is a

843
00:49:25,199 --> 00:49:27,039
temporary bridge for converts.

844
00:49:28,719 --> 00:49:32,840
Speaker 1: It's not a church, it's a right or a liturgical allowance,

845
00:49:33,880 --> 00:49:36,519
so it's not like a jurisdiction, and it's either under

846
00:49:36,599 --> 00:49:41,960
roc Or or it's under the Antiochians. And I'm not

847
00:49:42,000 --> 00:49:44,360
a huge fan of it, not because of the liturgy itself,

848
00:49:45,079 --> 00:49:47,400
just that so many of the times people want to

849
00:49:47,519 --> 00:49:50,599
bring in Latin errors and Latin theological mistakes and they

850
00:49:50,599 --> 00:49:53,280
don't get a good catechisas and it always ends up

851
00:49:53,320 --> 00:49:56,639
being a problem. And usually when people quote leave Orthodoxy

852
00:49:56,679 --> 00:49:59,440
for Rome. There are people who get into the Western right,

853
00:49:59,519 --> 00:50:01,880
so huge fan of it. But that doesn't mean there

854
00:50:01,920 --> 00:50:06,480
aren't good Western right pritorts and people there are. But

855
00:50:07,960 --> 00:50:13,000
like father in Saint Louis, the Western right up there

856
00:50:13,079 --> 00:50:15,880
was good because Father Hirschmier I think is his name,

857
00:50:16,519 --> 00:50:21,800
he's really good about Catechists. So there are some exceptions,

858
00:50:21,800 --> 00:50:27,719
but it just seems to constantly be an issue low quality.

859
00:50:28,199 --> 00:50:35,079
What's up? What is the problem with predestination? Big dirp

860
00:50:35,159 --> 00:50:38,360
ten dollars? In the Orthodox view, it's not a problem.

861
00:50:38,400 --> 00:50:41,039
We would see it as something that we would interpret

862
00:50:41,079 --> 00:50:45,679
through Christology. Go watch my multiple talks on Calvinism.

863
00:50:47,360 --> 00:50:50,880
Speaker 3: Hey, I want to say something real quick. Sure, Uh

864
00:50:51,239 --> 00:50:52,639
notice it's.

865
00:50:52,400 --> 00:50:56,480
Speaker 29: Not predetermination, it's predestined difference.

866
00:50:59,599 --> 00:51:01,480
Speaker 1: I mean I didn't know those things. I just thought

867
00:51:01,480 --> 00:51:02,199
they meant the same thing.

868
00:51:03,800 --> 00:51:07,280
Speaker 3: Well, I mean, to have a.

869
00:51:09,840 --> 00:51:14,800
Speaker 29: God know your destiny doesn't equate to that you're determined

870
00:51:15,840 --> 00:51:18,239
in the sense of overriding your free will.

871
00:51:18,639 --> 00:51:20,880
Speaker 3: And so I find it interesting that.

872
00:51:20,119 --> 00:51:25,440
Speaker 29: The word used, the phrase used is predestined, not predetermined,

873
00:51:31,599 --> 00:51:34,400
because I think determination carries with I don't think it

874
00:51:34,480 --> 00:51:34,920
has to.

875
00:51:35,159 --> 00:51:37,280
Speaker 1: Oh, I say, we're saying, well, I think a Calvinists

876
00:51:37,280 --> 00:51:38,039
will just say that.

877
00:51:39,000 --> 00:51:41,880
Speaker 3: Of the ability to do otherwise or something like that.

878
00:51:41,960 --> 00:51:44,199
Speaker 1: Well, Calvinists is going to say that the word predestination

879
00:51:44,360 --> 00:51:51,000
means predeterminism. So I don't know the etymological history, so

880
00:51:51,119 --> 00:51:54,159
I don't know how that would be sust out. Mar

881
00:51:54,239 --> 00:51:57,280
Dario three dollars redeem Zoomor had a tantrum in the discord.

882
00:51:57,920 --> 00:52:02,239
He called me autistic when I left it, and can orthodoxy. Well,

883
00:52:03,000 --> 00:52:07,599
I'm about to re upload to X the redeem Zoomer debate,

884
00:52:08,119 --> 00:52:20,519
so look forward to that later on this evening. What's up, Low, Hey?

885
00:52:20,840 --> 00:52:23,800
Speaker 9: Uh, just a quick question for you. I think this

886
00:52:23,880 --> 00:52:25,960
is something that you and I would disagree on. I

887
00:52:25,960 --> 00:52:32,679
don't necessarily see kind of the more pop science origin

888
00:52:32,840 --> 00:52:38,039
of the world as being conflicting with the creations were

889
00:52:38,039 --> 00:52:41,719
within the Bible, if you understand the Bible to be

890
00:52:42,000 --> 00:52:46,880
using more symbolic language and not necessarily like a literal

891
00:52:46,960 --> 00:52:50,360
six rotations around the sun. I know that this is

892
00:52:50,400 --> 00:52:52,199
something that people will hit you up on to try

893
00:52:52,199 --> 00:52:55,320
and you know, make you say something that you know

894
00:52:55,440 --> 00:52:59,360
pop science people will have soy face reactions to But

895
00:52:59,840 --> 00:53:01,960
it's the year love. I'm not trying to trip you

896
00:53:02,039 --> 00:53:06,039
up or anything, But where's the line in the creation

897
00:53:06,159 --> 00:53:09,239
story in Genesis? Is it something to be taken so literally?

898
00:53:09,519 --> 00:53:11,480
I mean, it's not really going to make or break

899
00:53:11,480 --> 00:53:15,119
my faith or anything. But what's why is so much

900
00:53:15,119 --> 00:53:20,519
weight put into the years or the calendar timeline? Like

901
00:53:20,519 --> 00:53:22,639
what's what are the stakes to the conversation?

902
00:53:23,239 --> 00:53:23,320
Speaker 3: Like?

903
00:53:23,400 --> 00:53:24,360
Speaker 19: Am I missing something?

904
00:53:25,800 --> 00:53:29,840
Speaker 1: So the seven day, the day, the week cycle that

905
00:53:29,880 --> 00:53:31,559
we have, where do you think that comes from?

906
00:53:33,840 --> 00:53:37,559
Speaker 9: I mean, ultimately it was made up by by somebody.

907
00:53:37,599 --> 00:53:40,360
I know, there's been several calendar reforms. It's it's kind

908
00:53:40,400 --> 00:53:44,800
of a just a human interpretation of movements based on

909
00:53:45,400 --> 00:53:48,800
you know, crops, based on tradition, based on long.

910
00:53:48,679 --> 00:53:50,599
Speaker 1: Way saying, do you think the seven day week is

911
00:53:50,599 --> 00:53:51,519
based on crops?

912
00:53:53,400 --> 00:53:57,239
Speaker 9: I mean calendars were used by different cultures to notate

913
00:53:57,280 --> 00:53:57,800
different things.

914
00:53:57,840 --> 00:54:00,599
Speaker 1: Well in the ancient world. In the ancient world, when

915
00:54:00,599 --> 00:54:04,000
the Hebrews talked about a seven day calendar, what what's

916
00:54:04,039 --> 00:54:04,599
it based on?

917
00:54:06,360 --> 00:54:06,880
Speaker 19: I don't know.

918
00:54:10,360 --> 00:54:14,280
Speaker 3: What's the Sabbath, the seventh day of rest?

919
00:54:15,119 --> 00:54:16,920
Speaker 1: Where where does that? Where does that.

920
00:54:16,840 --> 00:54:18,719
Speaker 19: Come from Yeah, the scriptures.

921
00:54:19,039 --> 00:54:21,320
Speaker 1: Okay, So that's what I'm saying, is like, if the

922
00:54:21,360 --> 00:54:26,760
seven day week that we have is a seven days,

923
00:54:27,079 --> 00:54:29,760
why wouldn't we think that what's mentioned in Genesis is

924
00:54:29,800 --> 00:54:31,239
intended to be seven days?

925
00:54:33,920 --> 00:54:34,079
Speaker 6: Uh?

926
00:54:35,440 --> 00:54:37,960
Speaker 9: Because it doesn't seem to be lining up with what

927
00:54:38,079 --> 00:54:38,840
is being.

928
00:54:40,639 --> 00:54:42,639
Speaker 19: Found out? I mean, I.

929
00:54:42,840 --> 00:54:45,239
Speaker 1: Guess by who? What do you mean found out? Like

930
00:54:45,280 --> 00:54:47,360
I just so, there's a paper out today that the

931
00:54:47,440 --> 00:54:49,920
universe isn't real? Is that was that? The soayance man

932
00:54:49,960 --> 00:54:55,239
that you're following. You're laughing, but that's literally what Forbes said.

933
00:54:55,880 --> 00:54:58,639
Speaker 19: No, it's and I get your point. You know, people.

934
00:54:58,480 --> 00:55:01,480
Speaker 9: Worship science, but it's a pro Thats not a not

935
00:55:01,559 --> 00:55:02,480
a knowledge claim.

936
00:55:02,519 --> 00:55:06,679
Speaker 1: Oh really, okay, how do you know? It's a process, it's.

937
00:55:06,719 --> 00:55:09,119
Speaker 19: A hypothesis, it's Is.

938
00:55:09,039 --> 00:55:10,679
Speaker 1: That not a knowledge claim? Wait a minute? Is that

939
00:55:10,719 --> 00:55:11,760
not a knowledge claim?

940
00:55:12,400 --> 00:55:13,599
Speaker 19: No, it's suggesting.

941
00:55:15,280 --> 00:55:18,079
Speaker 1: Whoa wait a minute, So you made a big mistake.

942
00:55:18,440 --> 00:55:19,039
You don't see that.

943
00:55:21,480 --> 00:55:22,639
Speaker 19: I mean, I'm I'm not.

944
00:55:22,760 --> 00:55:23,000
Speaker 7: I don't.

945
00:55:23,159 --> 00:55:32,679
Speaker 1: Science is a process. That's not a knowledge claim.

946
00:55:33,119 --> 00:55:35,119
Speaker 19: I mean, I'm taking.

947
00:55:34,840 --> 00:55:39,039
Speaker 9: The air out of the validity of using science quote

948
00:55:39,119 --> 00:55:44,960
unquote as a foundation for much of anything. Which I

949
00:55:44,960 --> 00:55:47,039
suppose is kind of, you know, contradicting.

950
00:55:48,880 --> 00:55:52,519
Speaker 1: I don't know, man, well, I mean again, I think

951
00:55:52,519 --> 00:55:56,079
it's a question of where we put priorities and what

952
00:55:56,119 --> 00:55:58,960
we think is certain and what we think is less certain.

953
00:55:59,119 --> 00:56:02,000
So for me, and this is probably where I'm out

954
00:56:02,000 --> 00:56:04,159
of a stet with most people in the modern world,

955
00:56:04,239 --> 00:56:08,360
I don't put the syance world very high on my

956
00:56:08,840 --> 00:56:12,480
category of authorities because I've watched it for many years,

957
00:56:12,519 --> 00:56:15,960
and I've been in academia, and I see how driven

958
00:56:16,000 --> 00:56:19,719
it is by fads, how many false papers there are,

959
00:56:20,840 --> 00:56:23,840
how much peer review research is bullshit. So I'm not

960
00:56:23,880 --> 00:56:25,760
saying at all is but a large large portion of

961
00:56:25,800 --> 00:56:27,840
it is. So I don't put much stock in that.

962
00:56:28,039 --> 00:56:29,800
And I'm a skeptic when it comes to most of

963
00:56:29,840 --> 00:56:33,199
those things. So whenever I hear people positing these kinds

964
00:56:33,239 --> 00:56:35,519
of positions, I'm always open to hearing it. I went

965
00:56:35,559 --> 00:56:40,159
through college and grad school endlessly hearing all the Darwinian dogmas,

966
00:56:40,159 --> 00:56:44,199
and I was debating my professors publicly on this topic

967
00:56:44,280 --> 00:56:48,039
back in my freshman or some my sophomore year. I

968
00:56:48,079 --> 00:56:51,960
debated my philosophy science professor at Philosophy Club publicly on

969
00:56:52,039 --> 00:56:56,599
the question of the epistemic basis for the scientific method

970
00:56:56,639 --> 00:56:58,400
when I was a sophomore. So I'm not bragging, but

971
00:56:58,400 --> 00:57:01,800
I'm saying, like I've thought about this a lot, and

972
00:57:01,960 --> 00:57:05,440
I'm not saying there's not some smart suoyance man that

973
00:57:05,440 --> 00:57:07,679
could come in and give me a good basis for

974
00:57:07,760 --> 00:57:10,719
a pistemology. But what I've already heard from what you're

975
00:57:10,760 --> 00:57:14,320
positing is a fundamental contradiction in the claims. So to me,

976
00:57:14,360 --> 00:57:16,000
I don't understand why I would even listen to the

977
00:57:16,000 --> 00:57:17,960
rest of what you're saying. In terms of argumentation. I

978
00:57:17,960 --> 00:57:20,360
don't mean it against you personally, but in terms of

979
00:57:20,400 --> 00:57:24,599
the argumentation, you said that you're not making knowledge claims,

980
00:57:25,039 --> 00:57:29,119
and then you said, but before that you said science progresses.

981
00:57:30,320 --> 00:57:32,280
I forget how you worded it. That's a knowledge claim.

982
00:57:32,320 --> 00:57:34,639
So it's like, have you do you know anything about

983
00:57:34,639 --> 00:57:35,559
epistemology at all?

984
00:57:36,920 --> 00:57:37,960
Speaker 19: Yeah, the basics.

985
00:57:38,079 --> 00:57:39,880
Speaker 9: I mean, I'm not going to pretend to be I

986
00:57:39,920 --> 00:57:41,000
did study philosophy.

987
00:57:41,039 --> 00:57:43,000
Speaker 19: I was an economics guy, so it's.

988
00:57:42,719 --> 00:57:45,159
Speaker 9: A different school than what I was putting time and

989
00:57:45,280 --> 00:57:49,239
energy into in Fairness Solved. I'll happily admit that I've

990
00:57:49,239 --> 00:57:49,800
got a lot.

991
00:57:49,679 --> 00:57:52,360
Speaker 19: More to learn on it. However, I guess the question kind.

992
00:57:52,280 --> 00:57:57,280
Speaker 9: Of boils down to whenever it comes to scripture and

993
00:57:57,280 --> 00:58:02,159
whenever it comes to divine revelation, what is the delineation

994
00:58:02,320 --> 00:58:07,159
for a literal interpretation for an exacting rather than something

995
00:58:07,159 --> 00:58:11,360
that can be interpreted more loosely, or perhaps you know,

996
00:58:11,599 --> 00:58:14,320
isn't revealed in such a black and white one.

997
00:58:14,119 --> 00:58:14,840
Speaker 19: And zero way.

998
00:58:15,679 --> 00:58:18,199
Speaker 1: Well, first of all, I never said that it's a

999
00:58:18,239 --> 00:58:21,840
black and white fundamentalist interpretation of the Book of Genesis.

1000
00:58:21,880 --> 00:58:25,039
I didn't say anything about anything like that. I just

1001
00:58:25,039 --> 00:58:29,920
simply pointed out problem in the pistemology. But the strictures

1002
00:58:29,920 --> 00:58:31,760
would be the mind of the church over time. So,

1003
00:58:31,800 --> 00:58:35,000
for example, the six Secumentical Council points out that you

1004
00:58:35,000 --> 00:58:38,039
can't say that there's death before the fall, and you're

1005
00:58:38,079 --> 00:58:41,679
positing a position that would require AONs millions of years

1006
00:58:41,679 --> 00:58:44,559
of death before we even get the existence of Adam,

1007
00:58:44,599 --> 00:58:46,719
and even in fact, aon's of death is what produces

1008
00:58:46,800 --> 00:58:50,320
Adam and Eve. To me, that seems preposterous just on

1009
00:58:50,360 --> 00:58:52,880
the basis of Romans eight, because Romans eight makes it

1010
00:58:52,920 --> 00:58:56,360
clear that Adam's fall is what introduced all forms of death,

1011
00:58:56,519 --> 00:58:59,960
whether physical, spiritual, whatever. So I mean, you're free to

1012
00:59:00,440 --> 00:59:03,280
disagree with Christianity, but if we're going to be honest

1013
00:59:03,320 --> 00:59:07,599
about Roman's eight and the six Secum Medical Council, then

1014
00:59:07,719 --> 00:59:09,880
it's not It doesn't make sense for a Christian to

1015
00:59:09,920 --> 00:59:13,079
hold to theistic evolution all this stuff. I mean, there's

1016
00:59:13,079 --> 00:59:15,199
many that do, and I understand we're all kind of

1017
00:59:15,320 --> 00:59:18,079
brought up in this idea and it's the air that

1018
00:59:18,119 --> 00:59:22,159
we breathe. But I approach it as a skeptic and

1019
00:59:22,239 --> 00:59:26,159
from a philosophical perspective, I don't understand what the argument

1020
00:59:26,280 --> 00:59:28,599
is that's supposed to convince me of this, and I've

1021
00:59:28,679 --> 00:59:32,599
been hearing it since I was eighteen in college. Feel

1022
00:59:32,639 --> 00:59:37,360
free to present some new argument that addresses my philosophical

1023
00:59:37,400 --> 00:59:40,559
concerns with the system. Because most people who argue in

1024
00:59:40,559 --> 00:59:43,440
this way, I'm not talking about you specifically, but they

1025
00:59:43,480 --> 00:59:47,559
take the approach that you do. They take empirical scientific

1026
00:59:47,639 --> 00:59:50,159
data as a kind of a given and the most

1027
00:59:50,440 --> 00:59:53,320
certain type of knowledge. Now maybe you don't, but most

1028
00:59:53,320 --> 00:59:56,400
people operate that way, and they never do good in

1029
00:59:56,480 --> 00:59:59,639
debates because they've never thought about the philosophy of these things.

1030
00:59:59,679 --> 01:00:03,360
They don't think about what does the scientific method assume

1031
01:00:03,559 --> 01:00:06,159
for it? To be possible. And that's what philosophy does

1032
01:00:06,239 --> 01:00:09,719
that it gets us to ask these more fundamental questions

1033
01:00:09,760 --> 01:00:12,920
about our assumptions. And so when I start doing that,

1034
01:00:12,920 --> 01:00:15,320
that's usually where people duck out because people in the

1035
01:00:15,360 --> 01:00:19,199
sayance realm, people in the domain of scientism, they're just

1036
01:00:19,360 --> 01:00:21,480
not taught any of this. They don't know anything about

1037
01:00:21,519 --> 01:00:24,480
these things unless they happen to take a philosophy of

1038
01:00:24,480 --> 01:00:26,320
science class, which is very few of them.

1039
01:00:26,840 --> 01:00:29,159
Speaker 19: Yeah, no, I think you're right.

1040
01:00:29,199 --> 01:00:30,920
Speaker 9: I think a lot of people are trying to appeal

1041
01:00:30,960 --> 01:00:34,719
to the system that at a really fundamental level directly

1042
01:00:34,840 --> 01:00:39,119
contradicts the system that's being taught at the university, at

1043
01:00:39,119 --> 01:00:41,440
the you know, academic you know.

1044
01:00:43,039 --> 01:00:46,840
Speaker 1: But I would argue that those people contradict themselves too,

1045
01:00:47,239 --> 01:00:52,360
So I don't understand. I mean, the academic establishment now

1046
01:00:52,400 --> 01:00:54,320
says that men are women and can be women.

1047
01:00:56,280 --> 01:00:58,679
Speaker 9: Well that's and that's why, you know, I started off

1048
01:00:58,719 --> 01:01:02,719
by saying that science, quote unquote is better understood as

1049
01:01:02,760 --> 01:01:04,599
a process. I think a lot of people fall into

1050
01:01:04,639 --> 01:01:07,719
the trap of, you know, anytime a white paper is published,

1051
01:01:07,760 --> 01:01:10,920
they say, oh, my god, like capital t truth in

1052
01:01:11,000 --> 01:01:12,320
my hands, black and white.

1053
01:01:12,360 --> 01:01:12,880
Speaker 3: Here it is.

1054
01:01:13,360 --> 01:01:15,719
Speaker 9: But that's clearly not the case, because give it six

1055
01:01:15,800 --> 01:01:18,679
months and some other white paper will totally.

1056
01:01:18,719 --> 01:01:20,840
Speaker 19: You know, fundamentally change the world.

1057
01:01:20,960 --> 01:01:21,119
Speaker 3: Men.

1058
01:01:21,559 --> 01:01:23,440
Speaker 19: But I don't want to take your whole night. I

1059
01:01:23,480 --> 01:01:25,840
really appreciate your time, man a lot to think.

1060
01:01:26,039 --> 01:01:27,719
Speaker 1: Well, I even I even I could even agree to

1061
01:01:27,760 --> 01:01:33,079
you that. Yeah, in a mundane sense. Sciences, you know, theorization,

1062
01:01:33,760 --> 01:01:36,599
it's theory. It's a progressing in a in a very

1063
01:01:36,960 --> 01:01:42,599
strict niche way. And that's precisely why science and scientific

1064
01:01:42,639 --> 01:01:46,519
discoveries by the very nature cannot tell you grand narratives.

1065
01:01:47,119 --> 01:01:49,800
So how is it like, if I'm studying this rock

1066
01:01:51,199 --> 01:01:54,599
without the assumptions of AONs of time, it's not going

1067
01:01:54,639 --> 01:01:58,880
to get me to the gigantic metaphysical leap of AONs

1068
01:01:58,880 --> 01:02:00,000
of time to produce the raw.

1069
01:02:02,559 --> 01:02:04,719
Speaker 9: Yeah, And I think that's why a lot of people are,

1070
01:02:05,440 --> 01:02:06,559
you know, they can't get down.

1071
01:02:06,440 --> 01:02:09,840
Speaker 19: To that root level of cause you know.

1072
01:02:09,840 --> 01:02:12,599
Speaker 9: They're still unanswered questions, and you know they'll have a

1073
01:02:12,639 --> 01:02:15,000
panic attack when you're like, Okay, how did this thing

1074
01:02:15,079 --> 01:02:16,679
that cannot have a beginning?

1075
01:02:17,079 --> 01:02:18,639
Speaker 19: You know, how did it come to be?

1076
01:02:19,320 --> 01:02:21,840
Speaker 9: And if science can't prove it, there's no answer, and

1077
01:02:21,880 --> 01:02:24,400
that just you know, you'll you'll see them squirm, you'll

1078
01:02:24,440 --> 01:02:26,159
hear them just get really uncomfortable.

1079
01:02:26,159 --> 01:02:28,280
Speaker 1: But well, why should I mean if I begin with

1080
01:02:28,320 --> 01:02:32,480
the position of the scientific method, how do I know

1081
01:02:32,519 --> 01:02:35,039
the scientific can the scientific method tell me the scientific

1082
01:02:35,119 --> 01:02:35,679
method is true?

1083
01:02:38,480 --> 01:02:39,519
Speaker 3: It's not. No, it's true.

1084
01:02:39,559 --> 01:02:41,039
Speaker 19: It's not self justifying.

1085
01:02:41,119 --> 01:02:44,599
Speaker 15: What you can do say, well, it's it is, you know,

1086
01:02:44,719 --> 01:02:45,920
it just it just.

1087
01:02:45,960 --> 01:02:46,960
Speaker 19: Works, you know.

1088
01:02:47,000 --> 01:02:56,639
Speaker 15: There's yeah, you telling me, but there's I think that

1089
01:02:56,679 --> 01:03:00,719
it's you know, it's good for recording observations, and it's

1090
01:03:00,800 --> 01:03:01,239
it's good.

1091
01:03:01,280 --> 01:03:02,320
Speaker 19: It has a purpose.

1092
01:03:02,360 --> 01:03:05,119
Speaker 9: I'm not going to say, you know, throw out observation

1093
01:03:05,280 --> 01:03:08,440
and questioning totally out the window as its place. But

1094
01:03:09,360 --> 01:03:13,599
it can't find it can't.

1095
01:03:13,639 --> 01:03:14,239
Speaker 19: It's got linen.

1096
01:03:15,239 --> 01:03:15,400
Speaker 5: Sure.

1097
01:03:15,480 --> 01:03:17,719
Speaker 1: Yeah, it's a tool for understanding the natural world.

1098
01:03:18,280 --> 01:03:18,400
Speaker 8: Uh.

1099
01:03:18,519 --> 01:03:22,159
Speaker 1: And it does really well for you know, engineering and

1100
01:03:22,159 --> 01:03:26,360
inventing things and figuring out patterns, you know, for you know,

1101
01:03:26,960 --> 01:03:29,519
but it's not going to tell you what the monkey

1102
01:03:29,639 --> 01:03:32,239
was telling the snake eleven million years ago in the tree.

1103
01:03:34,800 --> 01:03:47,559
Speaker 34: Connor, Yes, sir, Hey, how's it going.

1104
01:03:48,360 --> 01:03:51,239
Speaker 3: I was reading some story the other day and he.

1105
01:03:51,360 --> 01:03:54,679
Speaker 31: Made a statement of God is a tool we've created.

1106
01:03:54,719 --> 01:03:58,480
Speaker 3: But out room and in that I kind of saw two.

1107
01:03:58,400 --> 01:04:01,119
Speaker 31: Preconceptions maybe like we were touching on it earlier, of

1108
01:04:01,159 --> 01:04:04,559
like God, you know, not being created, and of course

1109
01:04:04,599 --> 01:04:06,480
kind of being good. And I feel like if you

1110
01:04:06,480 --> 01:04:09,000
make both of those mistakes, you're usually falling in the

1111
01:04:09,000 --> 01:04:11,039
atheist camp, and if you make one or the other,

1112
01:04:11,119 --> 01:04:13,920
you're falling in a maybe Jordan Peterson style like Bostic

1113
01:04:14,000 --> 01:04:16,559
camp or a Gnostic you know, God exists.

1114
01:04:16,199 --> 01:04:19,920
Speaker 3: But nondod Just wondering how you approach that.

1115
01:04:19,960 --> 01:04:23,880
Speaker 31: If you approach the God's you know, God being not created,

1116
01:04:23,920 --> 01:04:26,000
that God is the creator, or if you'd approach that

1117
01:04:26,079 --> 01:04:26,719
God is good.

1118
01:04:28,400 --> 01:04:31,320
Speaker 1: Yeah, I think you can approach it either way and

1119
01:04:31,440 --> 01:04:36,599
just ask for the justification for the possibility of speaking

1120
01:04:36,840 --> 01:04:40,280
and in those ways at all? What is a meaningful

1121
01:04:40,559 --> 01:04:43,639
phrase when you call something the good? At all? What

1122
01:04:43,800 --> 01:04:46,119
is the good? And the great thing about bringing up

1123
01:04:46,119 --> 01:04:47,960
something like the good is that it immediately gets you

1124
01:04:48,039 --> 01:04:50,679
in the domain of both ethics and metaphysics at once,

1125
01:04:50,840 --> 01:04:54,119
because it's pretty clearly something that's both. It relates to

1126
01:04:54,119 --> 01:05:00,480
both areas the good as a moral ethical element, where

1127
01:05:00,519 --> 01:05:04,519
we contrast it with the lesser or the bad. There's

1128
01:05:04,559 --> 01:05:06,400
an assumption that we should prefer or we ought to

1129
01:05:06,400 --> 01:05:09,480
prefer the good versus but not good. And it also

1130
01:05:09,559 --> 01:05:12,719
relates to metaphysics, do you know in some sense talk

1131
01:05:12,760 --> 01:05:15,440
about being? What is the good? Where is the good?

1132
01:05:15,440 --> 01:05:17,480
How do we know the good? This kind of stuff

1133
01:05:17,480 --> 01:05:20,199
that so it also touches on epistemology. So the good

1134
01:05:20,280 --> 01:05:21,960
is a great thing to bring up with any of

1135
01:05:21,960 --> 01:05:27,559
these people who oftentimes make value judgments and talk as if, well,

1136
01:05:27,599 --> 01:05:29,800
we all have you know, the idea about the good.

1137
01:05:30,320 --> 01:05:33,039
But there's no metaphysics, there's no God, there's no ethics,

1138
01:05:33,039 --> 01:05:35,719
there's no you know, it's just a really quickly I

1139
01:05:35,719 --> 01:05:38,440
would say, a collapsing position if you really drill into it.

1140
01:05:38,559 --> 01:05:53,880
Connor Rachel Wilson fifty dollars. You're cracking me up today.

1141
01:05:54,400 --> 01:05:57,679
Thank you, Rachel. Appreciate that big fat super chat. I

1142
01:05:57,679 --> 01:06:00,840
think she left the chat, but appreciate you being so

1143
01:06:01,000 --> 01:06:05,320
generous tonight, meet Mento's morey three dollars trick question Yakoub

1144
01:06:05,519 --> 01:06:08,719
is a rabbi? Oh just blew my mind. Well, Emmanuel

1145
01:06:08,800 --> 01:06:18,039
five dollars unblock. Does he want a debate? Jason? I

1146
01:06:18,079 --> 01:06:19,840
don't know who that is, but you know what, I

1147
01:06:19,920 --> 01:06:23,800
appreciate your five dollars superchat. But tonight's track record of

1148
01:06:24,000 --> 01:06:26,559
me unblocking the people that I had blocked is not

1149
01:06:26,920 --> 01:06:29,639
a very good track record. I'm gonna stick with my

1150
01:06:29,840 --> 01:06:33,880
intuitive sense that I was right to block whoever you're

1151
01:06:33,880 --> 01:06:37,239
talking about. Honeybee double on hundre one hundred dollars, Thank

1152
01:06:37,280 --> 01:06:40,360
you so much. Always a big fat champion super chatter

1153
01:06:40,440 --> 01:06:44,719
with those big fat superchats to Connor, what's up, hey?

1154
01:06:44,800 --> 01:06:44,920
Speaker 22: Ja?

1155
01:06:45,119 --> 01:06:48,320
Speaker 33: Come from a Protestant background to a lot of evidentialism

1156
01:06:48,559 --> 01:06:51,280
and running into issues with people.

1157
01:06:51,039 --> 01:06:54,000
Speaker 10: I talked to, and I really get the pushback of

1158
01:06:54,039 --> 01:06:55,760
the brute fact objection.

1159
01:06:56,280 --> 01:06:58,599
Speaker 3: How do you counter that with the transmental lookument.

1160
01:07:00,880 --> 01:07:05,159
Speaker 1: Well, roote fact doesn't, in my mind, constitute an objection,

1161
01:07:05,280 --> 01:07:09,039
It constitutes an assertion. So just simply saying that there

1162
01:07:09,079 --> 01:07:12,599
are brute facts number one doesn't solve the criteria problem,

1163
01:07:13,039 --> 01:07:15,480
and it kind of begs the question because like, well,

1164
01:07:15,519 --> 01:07:17,960
how do we know that's a brute fact versus all

1165
01:07:18,000 --> 01:07:20,199
the things that are supposedly not brute facts. So that's

1166
01:07:20,239 --> 01:07:24,840
another element of a standard or criterion. It would need

1167
01:07:24,880 --> 01:07:27,280
to suss out the brute facts from the non brute facts.

1168
01:07:27,840 --> 01:07:31,639
So either criteria problem or sussing out the brute facts

1169
01:07:31,639 --> 01:07:33,519
from the non brute facts. What I would think would

1170
01:07:33,519 --> 01:07:36,239
be enough to refute the silly idea that there's quote

1171
01:07:36,239 --> 01:07:37,079
brute facts.

1172
01:07:38,000 --> 01:07:40,320
Speaker 3: Oh yes, I'm basically ask you, how do you determine

1173
01:07:40,599 --> 01:07:43,000
what is a brute factor? What do you require more

1174
01:07:43,079 --> 01:07:43,760
justification for?

1175
01:07:45,320 --> 01:07:47,840
Speaker 1: So, again, the criterion problem would be that in order

1176
01:07:47,880 --> 01:07:50,000
for me to have a knowledge claim, I need a

1177
01:07:50,000 --> 01:07:53,239
theory of knowledge. And if I have a theory of knowledge,

1178
01:07:53,280 --> 01:07:56,159
that also is a knowledge claim. So it's kind of

1179
01:07:56,159 --> 01:07:59,239
a box that people that have this sort of found

1180
01:07:59,280 --> 01:08:01,800
date classical found national self evidence ye view, can never

1181
01:08:01,800 --> 01:08:04,559
get out of. It's a trap that they can't solve.

1182
01:08:04,960 --> 01:08:06,760
And usually when they try to solve it, they just

1183
01:08:07,400 --> 01:08:11,280
ignore the problem and restate something about something just being

1184
01:08:11,320 --> 01:08:14,000
the case. Why are we supposed to just assume that

1185
01:08:14,039 --> 01:08:17,079
your assertion or your dogmatic pronouncement of these things being

1186
01:08:17,119 --> 01:08:19,239
the case is the case? How do we know that?

1187
01:08:19,279 --> 01:08:21,479
Why ought we believe that? So I don't think they

1188
01:08:21,479 --> 01:08:24,520
can ever really give a clear answer as to the

1189
01:08:24,560 --> 01:08:30,039
epistemic grounds for believing in that as a brute fact.

1190
01:08:30,520 --> 01:08:33,640
And then another element of that problem is to say, well,

1191
01:08:33,640 --> 01:08:37,079
to call this thing a brute fact assumes that there's

1192
01:08:37,079 --> 01:08:41,039
some class of things that are brute facts versus the

1193
01:08:41,039 --> 01:08:44,399
things that are not brute facts. And on what basis?

1194
01:08:44,399 --> 01:08:46,520
And how do you know what the brute facts are?

1195
01:08:46,840 --> 01:08:49,640
It's very ad hoc, you see, and you need another

1196
01:08:49,720 --> 01:08:52,520
standard to say, oh, here's the ten things that are

1197
01:08:52,560 --> 01:08:55,119
the brute fact. Okay, what's the basis? What's the standard

1198
01:08:55,159 --> 01:08:58,760
the presupposition that tells you the ten brute facts versus

1199
01:08:58,760 --> 01:09:00,239
all the non brute facts.

1200
01:09:01,600 --> 01:09:02,840
Speaker 3: And then it's John's.

1201
01:09:05,239 --> 01:09:08,039
Speaker 30: And if you appeal to if you have a criterion

1202
01:09:08,079 --> 01:09:10,159
that has to explain the brute fat, then they're not

1203
01:09:10,239 --> 01:09:11,319
brute facts exactly.

1204
01:09:13,840 --> 01:09:14,560
Speaker 3: Is one of the problems.

1205
01:09:14,600 --> 01:09:15,880
Speaker 23: I guess that people I speak to are a little

1206
01:09:15,880 --> 01:09:17,000
bit less sophisticated, and.

1207
01:09:17,479 --> 01:09:18,960
Speaker 3: Argument really comes down to from them.

1208
01:09:19,239 --> 01:09:21,159
Speaker 10: It's not really even an argument, but what they say

1209
01:09:21,199 --> 01:09:23,840
is essentially things are generally as they appear to be

1210
01:09:23,920 --> 01:09:24,920
until otherwise.

1211
01:09:25,359 --> 01:09:29,760
Speaker 1: That's again, that's that's exactly.

1212
01:09:29,800 --> 01:09:33,199
Speaker 30: So that's what we're asking is they have a criterion,

1213
01:09:33,319 --> 01:09:37,880
But what's their justification for their justification criterion? Well, it's

1214
01:09:37,920 --> 01:09:41,359
just because I made it up. Yeah, it just is

1215
01:09:41,359 --> 01:09:42,079
I made it up.

1216
01:09:44,119 --> 01:09:46,039
Speaker 3: Okay, I'll have to think about that, thank you.

1217
01:09:46,239 --> 01:09:48,680
Speaker 30: I just think about saying the opposite. Well, actually it's

1218
01:09:48,680 --> 01:09:52,840
the opposite. Well how do you know that, Well, the

1219
01:09:52,880 --> 01:09:55,119
same way that you do. If you're allowed to make

1220
01:09:55,239 --> 01:09:59,039
up is a criterion, then I can take the opposite

1221
01:09:59,079 --> 01:10:00,840
of your position to say the same thing.

1222
01:10:03,640 --> 01:10:05,199
Speaker 3: Thank you, guys, appreciated.

1223
01:10:07,600 --> 01:10:09,960
Speaker 1: Absolutely. You notice a lot of what goes on in

1224
01:10:09,960 --> 01:10:12,920
philosophy is a lot of just so, well it's just.

1225
01:10:12,880 --> 01:10:20,600
Speaker 3: So exactly in word games semantic. What if I made

1226
01:10:20,640 --> 01:10:22,680
up another word exactly?

1227
01:10:23,439 --> 01:10:27,840
Speaker 30: And like I was reading like some guy's critique of me,

1228
01:10:27,920 --> 01:10:32,239
and he was he said, well, it's not circular to

1229
01:10:32,680 --> 01:10:39,600
appeal to your cognitive faculties, you know, if you're wondering

1230
01:10:39,600 --> 01:10:41,760
if your cognitive faculties work, because we have a name

1231
01:10:41,840 --> 01:10:45,720
for them philosophy. It's called faculty circularity. And I see

1232
01:10:45,720 --> 01:10:46,359
that's allowed.

1233
01:10:46,960 --> 01:10:51,039
Speaker 35: Like, oh, okay, thanks, thanks really, I didn't know that

1234
01:10:51,520 --> 01:10:53,479
you thanks for making.

1235
01:10:53,319 --> 01:10:57,760
Speaker 1: Up a word problem, James.

1236
01:10:59,000 --> 01:11:00,800
Speaker 3: Yeah, a ja, thanks for having me on.

1237
01:11:00,840 --> 01:11:05,359
Speaker 36: So I am a Catholic labs Catholic, and I've been

1238
01:11:05,399 --> 01:11:07,239
looking into Orthodoxy, so that's kind of.

1239
01:11:07,239 --> 01:11:10,199
Speaker 3: Hang on that I'm coming from.

1240
01:11:10,560 --> 01:11:13,439
Speaker 36: I try I hold you to kind of highest standard

1241
01:11:13,439 --> 01:11:16,640
as far as consistency goes and so I was curious

1242
01:11:16,680 --> 01:11:21,840
about watching you kind of completely smash this Muslim cleric

1243
01:11:21,880 --> 01:11:22,439
and debate.

1244
01:11:23,079 --> 01:11:24,880
Speaker 3: At one point you asked him, it's an hour in.

1245
01:11:24,960 --> 01:11:26,159
Speaker 36: To be fair, I don't know if you'll be able

1246
01:11:26,199 --> 01:11:29,760
to recall this specifically, but to make the argument that

1247
01:11:29,840 --> 01:11:35,039
his line of reasoning relies on asserting that God has changed.

1248
01:11:35,039 --> 01:11:37,319
At some point, you ask him, does creation come about

1249
01:11:37,359 --> 01:11:38,560
because God willed it at.

1250
01:11:38,439 --> 01:11:39,079
Speaker 3: A certain point?

1251
01:11:39,840 --> 01:11:43,079
Speaker 1: Yeah, you're talking about Shabiro, I mean Azra Rashid. Yeah,

1252
01:11:43,199 --> 01:11:43,720
I remember those.

1253
01:11:43,880 --> 01:11:46,520
Speaker 36: Yeah, And I don't feel like he made a good

1254
01:11:46,560 --> 01:11:49,279
showing in general. But like, just if I were arguing

1255
01:11:49,279 --> 01:11:52,520
with you for arguing sake, I might say something like, well,

1256
01:11:52,600 --> 01:11:57,039
creation includes time. Time is a prerequisite to change. Therefore, God,

1257
01:11:57,079 --> 01:11:59,680
being uncreated, acts eternally and is unchanged.

1258
01:11:59,760 --> 01:12:01,319
Speaker 3: I just wondering how you would refute that.

1259
01:12:02,680 --> 01:12:09,399
Speaker 1: Well, the act in question was that he was supposedly perfect. Well,

1260
01:12:09,880 --> 01:12:11,640
let's go back to what I was trying to argue

1261
01:12:11,680 --> 01:12:14,479
in that debate. So Islam relies a lot on this

1262
01:12:14,560 --> 01:12:18,640
idea of Allah's perfections, and so Allah possesses all supreme

1263
01:12:18,720 --> 01:12:24,479
perfections in himself as he is. And my argument was that, well,

1264
01:12:24,840 --> 01:12:29,199
if he's perfectly eternally perfect, and then he wills to

1265
01:12:29,279 --> 01:12:32,760
do something different that he wasn't willing, such as creating.

1266
01:12:33,479 --> 01:12:35,279
And it doesn't matter if you say, okay, yeah, he

1267
01:12:35,319 --> 01:12:39,960
creates time. That's a difference, right, because there was a

1268
01:12:39,960 --> 01:12:43,199
Allah without creation and others Allah with creation. So now

1269
01:12:43,239 --> 01:12:48,960
Allah has actualized attributes that he didn't previously actualize, such

1270
01:12:49,000 --> 01:12:56,680
as being providential or exercising interaction with the world or whatever,

1271
01:12:56,840 --> 01:13:00,920
or revealing the Quran to Gabriel. Right. And you'll notice

1272
01:13:00,960 --> 01:13:03,760
in Islam they oftentimes go back and forth on this

1273
01:13:03,760 --> 01:13:06,159
problem when you bring it up, because you can see

1274
01:13:06,159 --> 01:13:08,399
this and the reflected in the debate over whether the

1275
01:13:08,479 --> 01:13:12,159
Quran is the eternal speech and thus an eternal Quran

1276
01:13:12,319 --> 01:13:15,159
that then the created one is a copy of, or

1277
01:13:15,199 --> 01:13:18,840
whether there's just a eternal Allah and then a created Quran.

1278
01:13:18,960 --> 01:13:22,800
Most Muslims hold that the Quran is also, alongside Allah,

1279
01:13:23,199 --> 01:13:27,319
an eternal thing. But now we're getting into multiple eternals,

1280
01:13:27,720 --> 01:13:31,520
multiple which would be polytheism, right. So I was doing

1281
01:13:31,560 --> 01:13:33,720
a different route of argumentation with him, where I was

1282
01:13:33,760 --> 01:13:39,159
saying that if Allah is perfect from all eternity and

1283
01:13:39,439 --> 01:13:42,640
holds all the perfections, and he's also creator, but then

1284
01:13:42,720 --> 01:13:45,600
he creates at a point where he wasn't previously creator,

1285
01:13:46,000 --> 01:13:49,119
Then that's some kind of change because Allah would no

1286
01:13:49,199 --> 01:13:53,439
longer be all would have exercise attributes that he had

1287
01:13:53,439 --> 01:13:54,920
not exercised previously to that.

1288
01:13:56,840 --> 01:13:57,760
Speaker 3: Okay, So the.

1289
01:13:59,319 --> 01:14:02,279
Speaker 36: Sticking point for them, for the Muslim position is that

1290
01:14:04,279 --> 01:14:07,199
is this kind of line in the sand in terms

1291
01:14:07,199 --> 01:14:10,199
of God being perfect and having always been perfect, in

1292
01:14:10,399 --> 01:14:13,680
change being an implication of some point at which he

1293
01:14:13,840 --> 01:14:14,520
was imperfect.

1294
01:14:15,800 --> 01:14:19,880
Speaker 1: If there's change, it would imply imperfection. Yes, So but

1295
01:14:19,920 --> 01:14:24,079
my argument was, well, did he go from being a creator?

1296
01:14:25,319 --> 01:14:28,039
Did he go from not from not creating to creating?

1297
01:14:28,079 --> 01:14:31,119
And how would that not be some change? Yeah?

1298
01:14:31,279 --> 01:14:35,720
Speaker 36: Yeah, just curious what I'm still trying to grasp all

1299
01:14:35,720 --> 01:14:38,720
the presupp musicians that underpin all this in the first place.

1300
01:14:38,720 --> 01:14:43,439
Speaker 3: But what why is that not a conflict for us?

1301
01:14:43,520 --> 01:14:45,920
Speaker 36: And I've got another question about what's not a conflict

1302
01:14:45,960 --> 01:14:47,199
for us that is a conflict for them.

1303
01:14:47,520 --> 01:14:49,600
Speaker 1: Well, we believe in the essen center distinction. They don't

1304
01:14:49,600 --> 01:14:52,840
believe in the essence sentator distinction. So we have multiple

1305
01:14:52,920 --> 01:14:56,439
distinctions in God that they do not agree to. Okay,

1306
01:14:56,800 --> 01:15:01,000
So no, we have a much more elaborate sort ofitarian metaphysic.

1307
01:15:01,560 --> 01:15:05,000
Islam is not very elaborate in their metaphysics except.

1308
01:15:04,800 --> 01:15:06,960
Speaker 3: For its beautiful simplicity.

1309
01:15:06,520 --> 01:15:08,800
Speaker 1: Right right, well supposedly, but then when you get into

1310
01:15:09,039 --> 01:15:12,600
the attributes, they do get pretty crazy with trying to

1311
01:15:12,720 --> 01:15:14,199
figure out and debate the attributes.

1312
01:15:14,439 --> 01:15:16,840
Speaker 3: But yeah, that's that's that was pretty funny. The foot

1313
01:15:16,840 --> 01:15:17,479
that's not a foot.

1314
01:15:17,680 --> 01:15:20,720
Speaker 1: Well, what I'm saying though about yeah, specifically the act

1315
01:15:20,760 --> 01:15:25,159
of creation is that I was getting them to undertrying

1316
01:15:25,199 --> 01:15:27,680
to get them understand like, well, if Allah's action of

1317
01:15:27,720 --> 01:15:31,479
creating is eternal, then the effect would also be eternal.

1318
01:15:31,920 --> 01:15:34,880
You see, So there would be an eternal world, and

1319
01:15:35,159 --> 01:15:38,600
some of the Muslims, like I would assume Khalil holds

1320
01:15:38,640 --> 01:15:40,680
his position like he's in neoplatonists, and so he probably

1321
01:15:40,680 --> 01:15:42,520
wouldn't have a problem with that. Yeah, there's external worlds.

1322
01:15:42,520 --> 01:15:47,880
Allah has always generated worlds over which he's lore or something.

1323
01:15:48,560 --> 01:15:50,600
He's the lord of the world. So but that would

1324
01:15:50,600 --> 01:15:53,239
mean that, oh so there's these all these other eternal

1325
01:15:53,279 --> 01:15:56,000
things alongside a law that are not a lot. So

1326
01:15:56,039 --> 01:15:57,520
you're apologeist.

1327
01:15:58,000 --> 01:15:59,680
Speaker 3: Okay, gotcha, gotcha.

1328
01:16:00,840 --> 01:16:04,560
Speaker 36: At another point that debate, you said that you replied

1329
01:16:04,560 --> 01:16:06,439
something to him, like my model. He did it to

1330
01:16:07,159 --> 01:16:11,640
coke fallacy. He said, my model allows for circularity. That

1331
01:16:11,680 --> 01:16:13,199
came as kind of a surprise to me. I was

1332
01:16:13,239 --> 01:16:15,840
just wondering, is there a point is there in any

1333
01:16:15,920 --> 01:16:18,239
juncture where our model relies on circularity.

1334
01:16:19,279 --> 01:16:23,039
Speaker 1: Well, I believe that all authority claims or worldview claims,

1335
01:16:23,039 --> 01:16:25,079
at a certain level, they bought them out and they

1336
01:16:25,119 --> 01:16:30,159
rely on some form of recursion or self referencing. So

1337
01:16:30,279 --> 01:16:33,000
what I meant by circularity was not the fallacy of

1338
01:16:33,119 --> 01:16:36,720
circular reasoning, but that every position at some point becomes

1339
01:16:36,880 --> 01:16:40,800
self referencing. That's all I meant. And that's a part

1340
01:16:40,840 --> 01:16:45,119
of the point of presubpositional transcendal augmentation, is that if

1341
01:16:45,119 --> 01:16:50,359
there's not something that's self evident or just is, or

1342
01:16:51,720 --> 01:16:54,359
that everything is theory lighted, and if everything is stery lighted,

1343
01:16:54,359 --> 01:16:57,159
and then at a certain point you're going to reach

1344
01:16:57,279 --> 01:16:59,960
the ultimate authority in your worldview. For us, it would

1345
01:17:00,119 --> 01:17:02,479
be God, to which there could be no other thing

1346
01:17:02,560 --> 01:17:04,760
to appeal to. So, in other words, at that point

1347
01:17:04,880 --> 01:17:08,359
in our worldview, it's not the fallacy of authority if

1348
01:17:08,399 --> 01:17:11,279
God exists, because he's the ultimate funnel authority.

1349
01:17:12,119 --> 01:17:14,279
Speaker 3: Gotcha? Okay? Jae, that's all I had. Thank you so much.

1350
01:17:14,359 --> 01:17:17,239
Speaker 1: Yeah, great questions. I'm glad that somebody was going back

1351
01:17:17,279 --> 01:17:22,199
through that. The one of the other problems with that

1352
01:17:22,279 --> 01:17:24,439
debate with Osbar Rashid is that a lot of the

1353
01:17:24,520 --> 01:17:29,920
Muslims a lot of the metaphysical, theological, philosophical terms that

1354
01:17:29,960 --> 01:17:34,039
we use, and they don't translate into their system and so,

1355
01:17:35,199 --> 01:17:39,479
for example, they don't really have, as far as I'm aware,

1356
01:17:39,640 --> 01:17:43,479
like an actus purest conception of God or Allah's essence.

1357
01:17:44,000 --> 01:17:46,600
They would say He's perfect and so all that possesses

1358
01:17:46,640 --> 01:17:51,720
all the perfections. But I was trying to relay that

1359
01:17:51,960 --> 01:17:55,159
idea of the fact that if He's willing something now

1360
01:17:55,199 --> 01:17:58,880
that he didn't previously will, if Allah is his will

1361
01:17:58,960 --> 01:18:01,960
and so forth, then that would be a change in him.

1362
01:18:02,840 --> 01:18:06,039
And it was difficult to convey that because I only

1363
01:18:06,079 --> 01:18:09,680
had the toolkit of working with all his perfections but

1364
01:18:09,880 --> 01:18:12,039
not the notion of act as puris, And so I

1365
01:18:12,079 --> 01:18:15,359
was trying to translate a modal collapse argument into Islam.

1366
01:18:16,159 --> 01:18:17,680
And it kind of worked because he was kind of

1367
01:18:17,720 --> 01:18:20,640
saying at one point that well, he's eternally the creator,

1368
01:18:20,960 --> 01:18:23,279
but he creates in time. And my point was yeah,

1369
01:18:23,279 --> 01:18:25,560
I get that. I know you believe that. But if

1370
01:18:25,600 --> 01:18:29,000
the action of creating is an eternal action, then it

1371
01:18:29,039 --> 01:18:31,960
seems to follow that the effect of that action would

1372
01:18:31,960 --> 01:18:37,239
also be eternal, namely a world. So if there's a

1373
01:18:37,319 --> 01:18:41,720
doing of something new, then that would suggest a change

1374
01:18:41,720 --> 01:18:44,560
in a law according to their perfections model. That's what

1375
01:18:44,600 --> 01:18:44,840
I was.

1376
01:18:44,760 --> 01:18:48,439
Speaker 36: Trying to which would make that world uncreated, which would

1377
01:18:48,439 --> 01:18:49,359
make that world.

1378
01:18:49,119 --> 01:18:51,960
Speaker 1: God, yeah, we be polytheism. It would refute their position.

1379
01:18:52,039 --> 01:18:53,399
Speaker 3: Yeah, gotcha, thank you.

1380
01:18:55,479 --> 01:18:58,840
Speaker 1: But I don't know that I conveyed that argument to him,

1381
01:18:59,000 --> 01:19:01,800
because he doesn't. He didn't seem to have many of

1382
01:19:01,800 --> 01:19:19,159
those same philosophical kind of ideas. Ethics. You gotta unmute ethics.

1383
01:19:20,680 --> 01:19:24,119
I want to thank you guys for being so degenerate, generous,

1384
01:19:24,159 --> 01:19:28,279
not degenerous. So many degenerous men. Tonight and ladies, Allula

1385
01:19:28,319 --> 01:19:32,359
five dollars day, happy, happy lou Yer say this in

1386
01:19:32,359 --> 01:19:34,600
a Boston accent. I look forward to telling you, the

1387
01:19:34,640 --> 01:19:37,279
pumpous liberals that not one of the heroes can beat

1388
01:19:37,279 --> 01:19:40,359
you in a debate. You're my favorite philosophy gladiator. No homo,

1389
01:19:40,560 --> 01:19:41,920
that was a dude. I thought I was a girl.

1390
01:19:42,319 --> 01:19:46,680
My bad Alula I just got homo with you. Michael

1391
01:19:46,840 --> 01:19:49,760
generon five dollars greens from the gener Repelic Do you

1392
01:19:49,840 --> 01:19:55,399
consider promoting Holy Trinity Monastery? Everything I've seen coming out

1393
01:19:55,399 --> 01:20:02,399
of Jordanville is good, looks like going there for Somemary

1394
01:20:02,479 --> 01:20:06,760
eventually teaching there, Like, oh, you're asking me, No, I

1395
01:20:06,760 --> 01:20:10,079
don't think I would be fit to be a any

1396
01:20:10,159 --> 01:20:12,880
kind of a professor or anything like that. I'm a

1397
01:20:12,880 --> 01:20:17,039
comedian man, jmil thirty dollars. You have thoughts about the

1398
01:20:17,119 --> 01:20:21,039
validity of famous Catholic priests when they talk about exorcisms

1399
01:20:21,039 --> 01:20:24,079
on all these podcasts, I mean, it's entirely possible.

1400
01:20:24,119 --> 01:20:24,399
Speaker 5: I don't.

1401
01:20:24,479 --> 01:20:28,479
Speaker 1: I can't say, But I also know that even if

1402
01:20:28,520 --> 01:20:33,560
the exorcisms are authentic and happening and helping people, that's

1403
01:20:33,640 --> 01:20:36,000
because of the name of Christ. It's in spite of papism,

1404
01:20:36,079 --> 01:20:38,680
not because of papism. Radical.

1405
01:20:40,279 --> 01:20:43,199
Speaker 29: Yeah, professors and comedians are one of the same.

1406
01:20:44,000 --> 01:20:47,800
Speaker 1: So well, I think of you as a very funny person,

1407
01:20:47,880 --> 01:20:52,319
So yes, you're you're a comedian to me, You're a

1408
01:20:52,319 --> 01:20:57,279
comedian in my heart. Real Cali Prepper three dollars. Can

1409
01:20:57,319 --> 01:21:00,479
the church air in a canon? Canon is of a

1410
01:21:00,560 --> 01:21:05,600
saint I mean, there might be some localized mistake, but

1411
01:21:05,640 --> 01:21:08,319
I think over time the mind of the church would

1412
01:21:08,640 --> 01:21:14,079
know and wouldn't ultimately universally err in that way or

1413
01:21:14,119 --> 01:21:18,640
the dox. These canonizations are typically local or not, Like

1414
01:21:19,239 --> 01:21:21,840
we don't have the ghostbusters in Rome that do all

1415
01:21:21,880 --> 01:21:24,960
this la gear. What's up man?

1416
01:21:38,880 --> 01:21:39,279
Speaker 4: The gear?

1417
01:21:41,359 --> 01:21:41,880
Speaker 1: Ethics?

1418
01:21:42,760 --> 01:21:45,159
Speaker 3: Do you take it that God has propositional knowledge? Yes

1419
01:21:45,279 --> 01:21:45,439
or no?

1420
01:21:48,000 --> 01:21:49,319
Speaker 1: Not in a creature really sense?

1421
01:21:50,520 --> 01:21:52,199
Speaker 3: Sorry, should just be clear. Do you take it that

1422
01:21:52,239 --> 01:21:54,720
in order for God to know, XS be acquainted with

1423
01:21:54,760 --> 01:21:56,199
the proositional content.

1424
01:21:55,880 --> 01:21:58,760
Speaker 1: That as God's I don't think we should think, as

1425
01:21:58,800 --> 01:22:02,359
doctor Branson says, that God's knowledge is anything like our knowledge.

1426
01:22:02,880 --> 01:22:04,199
Speaker 3: So it's not going to be the case that God

1427
01:22:04,199 --> 01:22:05,359
has proposition knowledge. Breck.

1428
01:22:06,479 --> 01:22:08,640
Speaker 1: We just may not understand how he has knowledge. What's

1429
01:22:08,640 --> 01:22:11,960
your point, what's your argument? I'm not gonna know. I'm

1430
01:22:11,960 --> 01:22:15,479
not gonna agree, So you're not going to get an argument.

1431
01:22:15,520 --> 01:22:22,039
You just want to get on here to get First

1432
01:22:22,079 --> 01:22:24,960
of all, I don't accept the premise that it's a

1433
01:22:25,039 --> 01:22:28,159
yes or no because that involves a lot of metaphysical

1434
01:22:28,319 --> 01:22:32,319
theological issues. So you're poisoning the well from the outset

1435
01:22:32,359 --> 01:22:35,560
to force me into trying to argue as if it's

1436
01:22:35,840 --> 01:22:38,159
a yes or no, either or question, and I might

1437
01:22:38,239 --> 01:22:40,960
reject that from the outset, And the fact that you

1438
01:22:41,039 --> 01:22:42,479
just yap and you're not going to make an actual

1439
01:22:42,560 --> 01:22:44,399
argument is a waste server that's time.

1440
01:22:46,640 --> 01:22:50,760
Speaker 3: What isn't that already giving you like a false economy?

1441
01:22:50,800 --> 01:22:54,159
Speaker 1: From his own point, most likely it's just a but.

1442
01:22:54,359 --> 01:22:58,079
Speaker 30: You're just added Mesburg energy to and you can transform

1443
01:22:58,119 --> 01:23:00,399
to any fallacy into a legitimate argument.

1444
01:23:00,800 --> 01:23:03,199
Speaker 22: Yeah, but I didn't even understand what he said. He

1445
01:23:03,239 --> 01:23:06,399
said it like so spurring, and he didn't even make sense.

1446
01:23:07,520 --> 01:23:08,640
Speaker 1: What's on that? What's on your mouth?

1447
01:23:10,560 --> 01:23:14,720
Speaker 22: Look, first of all, thank you for bringing me on here,

1448
01:23:14,760 --> 01:23:16,920
But I wanted to just like ask a little bit

1449
01:23:16,960 --> 01:23:19,520
of questions about several quotes that I have here.

1450
01:23:19,720 --> 01:23:22,000
Speaker 3: It's from some type of transcript that.

1451
01:23:22,000 --> 01:23:25,479
Speaker 22: I got from debate that you know, you know who

1452
01:23:25,640 --> 01:23:26,760
made by Jim bob Is.

1453
01:23:27,560 --> 01:23:28,680
Speaker 1: Yeah.

1454
01:23:29,039 --> 01:23:33,319
Speaker 22: Yeah, So there was this you know, how fucking stupid

1455
01:23:33,359 --> 01:23:38,000
TikTok gets right, and how idiotic the philosophers right there are.

1456
01:23:38,840 --> 01:23:42,600
So there was this guy who really had a horrible

1457
01:23:42,640 --> 01:23:44,760
type of position. Because I'm just going to tell you

1458
01:23:44,920 --> 01:23:46,760
right now, what's his main arguments?

1459
01:23:47,600 --> 01:23:49,479
Speaker 3: So the guy didn't believe in absolute truth.

1460
01:23:49,560 --> 01:23:53,880
Speaker 22: He was a subjectivist of logic, and he didn't actually

1461
01:23:54,000 --> 01:23:56,760
have any type of view of truth. He said that

1462
01:23:56,880 --> 01:23:59,960
he had a deflationist view of truth. What do you

1463
01:24:00,039 --> 01:24:00,600
think about that.

1464
01:24:02,119 --> 01:24:05,640
Speaker 1: Deflationist? I have no idea what that means.

1465
01:24:05,680 --> 01:24:10,319
Speaker 22: Some type of manner that it classifies logic as no, No,

1466
01:24:10,399 --> 01:24:14,880
it classifies truth as being contextually within linguistic manners or

1467
01:24:14,920 --> 01:24:20,359
something like that. I don't know, something like it's based

1468
01:24:20,399 --> 01:24:23,640
on the context of a linguistic discussion.

1469
01:24:23,920 --> 01:24:26,479
Speaker 3: So let's say that as the.

1470
01:24:26,439 --> 01:24:28,720
Speaker 22: Snow is white, and that makes it truth for a

1471
01:24:28,800 --> 01:24:30,720
main context or or something.

1472
01:24:30,720 --> 01:24:32,079
Speaker 3: I guess it's very stupid.

1473
01:24:32,720 --> 01:24:34,720
Speaker 1: Well, I would just ask, how do we know that

1474
01:24:34,760 --> 01:24:38,720
the break the first premise is true, that all truth

1475
01:24:38,760 --> 01:24:41,319
is reduced to some form of linguistic discussion.

1476
01:24:42,640 --> 01:24:47,359
Speaker 22: Yeah, I mean the other thing is that. So just

1477
01:24:47,399 --> 01:24:50,039
to tell you the level of stupidity this guy, thus

1478
01:24:50,640 --> 01:24:53,800
made by Jimbub made an excellent question to this guy,

1479
01:24:54,000 --> 01:24:54,920
which is.

1480
01:24:57,239 --> 01:24:59,840
Speaker 3: To the night the law of identity.

1481
01:25:00,039 --> 01:25:03,520
Speaker 22: You need to use the law of identity to prove that.

1482
01:25:04,600 --> 01:25:08,760
Speaker 3: And it's just like a very much a what's the

1483
01:25:08,840 --> 01:25:09,760
name of this fallacy?

1484
01:25:10,600 --> 01:25:17,680
Speaker 22: It's a I don't exactly remember the name of the fallacy,

1485
01:25:17,800 --> 01:25:21,119
but it's show how inconsistent the position is.

1486
01:25:21,119 --> 01:25:24,399
Speaker 3: Because to deny logic you need to use logic, right.

1487
01:25:25,079 --> 01:25:27,199
Speaker 1: I mean, that's just called reetortion in Aristotle.

1488
01:25:28,520 --> 01:25:34,159
Speaker 22: Yeah, so this this guy's literally made up presupposition and

1489
01:25:34,199 --> 01:25:37,920
then beg the question because he then responded that you

1490
01:25:38,079 --> 01:25:42,000
can you can deny the law of non contradiction because

1491
01:25:42,000 --> 01:25:42,399
you're a.

1492
01:25:42,720 --> 01:25:45,800
Speaker 3: Because you could be a subjectivist about logic. You see

1493
01:25:45,800 --> 01:25:46,760
how stupid that is.

1494
01:25:47,960 --> 01:25:50,359
Speaker 1: Yeah, I mean that's I mean, that sounds like the

1495
01:25:50,520 --> 01:25:54,680
standard TikTok sphere for sure. I don't. I mean, there's

1496
01:25:54,720 --> 01:25:58,359
no subjectivist to count for logic that would be coherent.

1497
01:26:01,319 --> 01:26:14,399
Speaker 3: Noelan Hello, Yeah, Hey, what's going on, Jay?

1498
01:26:14,479 --> 01:26:15,119
Speaker 1: What's on your mind?

1499
01:26:16,119 --> 01:26:16,319
Speaker 10: So?

1500
01:26:16,359 --> 01:26:21,079
Speaker 35: I have a Russian buddy of mine who was talking

1501
01:26:21,119 --> 01:26:26,800
to me about some Russian Orthodox priests having multiple wives.

1502
01:26:27,520 --> 01:26:31,680
I was curious on what your take is on what

1503
01:26:31,800 --> 01:26:33,640
the Orthodox of you is on poligion.

1504
01:26:35,199 --> 01:26:36,680
Speaker 1: I've never heard of that. I mean, I know I'm

1505
01:26:36,840 --> 01:26:39,840
saying it's not possible, but no, I don't think that's

1506
01:26:40,600 --> 01:26:42,800
There's a lot of people who in the Orthodox Church

1507
01:26:43,399 --> 01:26:46,760
operate non canonically. Probably I would say a lot but

1508
01:26:46,800 --> 01:26:48,359
I'm saying the history of the church. I'm sure there

1509
01:26:48,399 --> 01:26:52,279
have been many priests bishops who have you know, not

1510
01:26:52,479 --> 01:26:55,279
lived according to their calling. So but I've never heard

1511
01:26:55,319 --> 01:27:11,760
of any Orthodox arguing for polygamy. Luke, thank you guys

1512
01:27:11,800 --> 01:27:14,079
for the super chest and I MKG ten dollars. Most

1513
01:27:14,079 --> 01:27:17,119
of the ex Muslims that our Iranians want some kind

1514
01:27:17,159 --> 01:27:20,279
of Jesus without the rules. Many of them convert because

1515
01:27:20,279 --> 01:27:23,079
they hate Islam. It's very common they think Christianity is

1516
01:27:23,119 --> 01:27:26,159
an American non denominational religion that they see in Hollywood movies.

1517
01:27:27,000 --> 01:27:30,119
I mean, unfortunately that's probably true. So that guy was

1518
01:27:32,079 --> 01:27:35,159
I I just I'm in the Year of Love. I'm

1519
01:27:35,159 --> 01:27:41,039
trying to learn to exit situations that are gonna be

1520
01:27:42,279 --> 01:27:48,520
not going anywhere. Luke, what's up, hey, j what's on

1521
01:27:48,560 --> 01:27:48,880
your mind?

1522
01:27:50,479 --> 01:27:54,680
Speaker 17: Well, I'm gonna sure if you've spoken to like crazy

1523
01:27:54,720 --> 01:27:55,439
Baptists like me.

1524
01:27:55,680 --> 01:27:59,479
Speaker 3: But I'm one of those of beliefs that the Baptists

1525
01:27:59,560 --> 01:28:02,520
like trace their origins back to the First Church.

1526
01:28:02,920 --> 01:28:05,960
Speaker 17: And honestly, there's like so many topics who you probably

1527
01:28:05,960 --> 01:28:06,319
talk about.

1528
01:28:06,359 --> 01:28:07,640
Speaker 3: I don't even really know where to start.

1529
01:28:07,840 --> 01:28:10,600
Speaker 1: But why would you want to trace your origin through

1530
01:28:10,680 --> 01:28:13,279
people like the all Virginsians and people that are heretics

1531
01:28:13,279 --> 01:28:16,720
and were anti trinitarian. That's crazy.

1532
01:28:17,279 --> 01:28:19,239
Speaker 17: Don't necessarily chase my origins through them.

1533
01:28:19,359 --> 01:28:21,880
Speaker 1: So like, well, hold on, are you are you trailed blood?

1534
01:28:22,199 --> 01:28:22,359
Speaker 19: Think?

1535
01:28:23,000 --> 01:28:24,720
Speaker 3: Well, I think like even as you said.

1536
01:28:24,560 --> 01:28:26,000
Speaker 1: Are you trail of blood?

1537
01:28:28,359 --> 01:28:31,119
Speaker 17: Not like like in the perfection of that book, like

1538
01:28:31,439 --> 01:28:33,279
not like saying that that book is perfect and it

1539
01:28:33,359 --> 01:28:37,680
has all historical accounts accurately. But I mean it's you

1540
01:28:37,880 --> 01:28:40,760
you can like basically you know, look at books like that,

1541
01:28:40,880 --> 01:28:43,399
just like I'm sure like there's orthodox historical books that

1542
01:28:43,439 --> 01:28:44,159
have airs.

1543
01:28:43,880 --> 01:28:46,000
Speaker 1: In them that you know need to be Okay, So

1544
01:28:46,199 --> 01:28:48,520
it's all of the people in church history and the

1545
01:28:48,560 --> 01:28:53,560
Trail of Blood that are not anti trinitarian that you follow. Like, so,

1546
01:28:53,640 --> 01:28:55,720
who are the Baptists in those centuries when the Trail

1547
01:28:55,720 --> 01:28:57,760
of Blood cites the anti Trinitarians?

1548
01:28:59,239 --> 01:29:02,359
Speaker 17: Well, I think like just I mean, I mean the

1549
01:29:02,760 --> 01:29:05,199
argument I think that the Trailer Blood makes it it

1550
01:29:05,199 --> 01:29:07,800
does have a degree of accuracy, is that is that

1551
01:29:07,840 --> 01:29:11,319
those those that did believe the truths were slaughtered there.

1552
01:29:11,439 --> 01:29:13,880
Speaker 1: Okay, so name the Baptists in those centuries.

1553
01:29:15,079 --> 01:29:17,319
Speaker 17: Well, the way that I look at it is kind

1554
01:29:17,319 --> 01:29:21,279
of like a representative type group. So like one one.

1555
01:29:21,560 --> 01:29:24,880
I guess you could say powerful argument and I'd like

1556
01:29:24,920 --> 01:29:26,279
to hear what you thought, so are on it is

1557
01:29:26,319 --> 01:29:29,199
that like the Waldensis Uh.

1558
01:29:29,239 --> 01:29:32,840
Speaker 3: Basically when they came out of the out of hiding.

1559
01:29:32,600 --> 01:29:36,680
Speaker 17: So to speak, uh, in the Reformation period, they they

1560
01:29:36,960 --> 01:29:40,560
they declared like just straight up like we we we

1561
01:29:40,560 --> 01:29:43,319
were the original, we were founded by the apostles, like

1562
01:29:43,359 --> 01:29:45,680
we we did not start with Peter Waldo.

1563
01:29:46,640 --> 01:29:50,520
Speaker 1: And you believe that there were Waldensians in the first, second, third, fourth, fifth, sixth,

1564
01:29:50,520 --> 01:29:51,560
seventh century.

1565
01:29:52,399 --> 01:29:56,119
Speaker 17: The it's it's a possibility that the Vaudois in the

1566
01:29:56,199 --> 01:29:58,800
in the house of Italy, uh, that that they did

1567
01:29:58,880 --> 01:30:00,800
actually trace the roots by that time.

1568
01:30:01,039 --> 01:30:03,399
Speaker 1: Okay, and give me some examples of Waldensians in the

1569
01:30:03,399 --> 01:30:09,199
first seven centuries. I don't have anything because it doesn't exist.

1570
01:30:11,880 --> 01:30:13,800
Speaker 3: Well, I mean, I guess.

1571
01:30:17,239 --> 01:30:21,039
Speaker 1: Meta.

1572
01:30:21,840 --> 01:30:27,359
Speaker 3: Hello, yep, hey, so that was pretty abrupt. I just

1573
01:30:27,439 --> 01:30:30,560
have a quick question. So I heard this from an atheist,

1574
01:30:30,560 --> 01:30:32,640
and I honestly didn't really know how to answer it.

1575
01:30:33,479 --> 01:30:38,720
Speaker 25: So essentially what he told me was that he agrees

1576
01:30:39,039 --> 01:30:43,439
with Christianity's metaphysical claims to a certain extent, but he

1577
01:30:43,520 --> 01:30:47,239
wants to separate the derivatives of it from the divinity

1578
01:30:47,239 --> 01:30:47,760
of Christ.

1579
01:30:48,239 --> 01:30:49,079
Speaker 3: Is that possible?

1580
01:30:52,520 --> 01:30:55,880
Speaker 1: I think that's a unique, honest Muslim situation, I mean

1581
01:30:56,000 --> 01:31:00,560
atheist situation, like, yeah, I want all the Christian metaphysics

1582
01:31:00,560 --> 01:31:03,199
but not the Christian God. Well, the metaphysics are grounded

1583
01:31:03,199 --> 01:31:05,760
in the Christian God. So how would you get how

1584
01:31:05,760 --> 01:31:08,840
would you get that? I don't understand meretheism. What's up

1585
01:31:17,840 --> 01:31:19,920
anonymous one dollar? How do you respond the doorcs that

1586
01:31:19,960 --> 01:31:22,800
act like monks in the world, they act like their

1587
01:31:22,960 --> 01:31:26,279
Orthodox talk about all the time. They say to avoid

1588
01:31:26,319 --> 01:31:29,880
all non orthodox, we should only be praying at our

1589
01:31:30,000 --> 01:31:33,800
jobs and at our work. I mean everybody's going to have,

1590
01:31:34,279 --> 01:31:37,920
you know, temptations and flirtations with pre last I mean

1591
01:31:38,920 --> 01:31:41,800
usually what happens to those situations is that they eventually

1592
01:31:41,840 --> 01:31:48,319
burn out and then kind of don't become so annoying.

1593
01:31:48,399 --> 01:31:51,319
Hopefully storm the cat ten dollars, buy your cube. You

1594
01:31:51,359 --> 01:31:55,239
better behave yourself, okay, disciple X one dollar? Reach out

1595
01:31:55,239 --> 01:31:59,479
to Donnie or Marlin at Gospel Truth again. They people

1596
01:31:59,520 --> 01:32:01,960
can come debate here. I'm not going to chase down

1597
01:32:02,000 --> 01:32:08,680
every evangelical quack. Eugenia ten dollars. Thank you, Paul said,

1598
01:32:09,119 --> 01:32:13,039
there's different gifts. I'm glad you found yours. Don't change

1599
01:32:13,039 --> 01:32:17,920
your retorted fund. I won't God forgive me ten dollars lmao,

1600
01:32:18,560 --> 01:32:23,000
Big goon, ten dollars, Lucas dupam, three dollars. Jay from

1601
01:32:23,000 --> 01:32:27,159
Brazil shout out. I did the same trick. I was Protestant,

1602
01:32:27,520 --> 01:32:32,399
traditional Catholic and Orthodox, trying to find something Portuguese to

1603
01:32:32,439 --> 01:32:39,159
help my Pentecostal ex girlfriend. Yeah, hopefully something will come about.

1604
01:32:39,439 --> 01:32:43,680
Jordan Flora's ten dollars call into Andrew's debate, ask the

1605
01:32:43,800 --> 01:32:48,119
gay pastor about epistemic questions. I didn't even realize he

1606
01:32:48,199 --> 01:32:51,560
was doing a debate until we had already gotten a

1607
01:32:51,560 --> 01:32:53,760
few hours into those van five dollars. What's your opinion

1608
01:32:53,760 --> 01:32:56,520
on the kilshot argument against Protestants if you had to

1609
01:32:56,600 --> 01:33:00,840
choose one, I start Catechism this week over your content.

1610
01:33:01,159 --> 01:33:04,279
You helped me see God. I respect you word to Christ.

1611
01:33:05,840 --> 01:33:08,520
I mean, there's so many Protestants Protestant problems.

1612
01:33:08,560 --> 01:33:09,000
Speaker 23: I don't.

1613
01:33:10,520 --> 01:33:14,079
Speaker 1: I think the Canada Scripture is the strongest argument because

1614
01:33:14,680 --> 01:33:16,439
they're always just going to default to that, and if

1615
01:33:16,479 --> 01:33:18,600
you can remove that out from under them, the whole

1616
01:33:18,600 --> 01:33:20,359
thing collapses mirror what's.

1617
01:33:20,199 --> 01:33:27,279
Speaker 37: Up either, Jay, I'm a theist, and I'm also someone

1618
01:33:27,279 --> 01:33:31,600
who holds to biological evolution. I'm aware of some of

1619
01:33:31,640 --> 01:33:35,000
your broader philosophical critiques of evolution, and.

1620
01:33:35,319 --> 01:33:36,800
Speaker 7: I sympathize with those a lot.

1621
01:33:37,960 --> 01:33:38,800
Speaker 16: But have you.

1622
01:33:39,119 --> 01:33:44,680
Speaker 37: Addressed any of the specific empirical evidence scientifically for evolution?

1623
01:33:46,000 --> 01:33:49,319
Speaker 1: Just in that the empirical evidence requires some sort of

1624
01:33:49,600 --> 01:33:53,199
narrative paradigm interpretation. I don't think that the evidence is

1625
01:33:53,239 --> 01:33:56,840
self interpreting or brute fact or anything like that. So

1626
01:33:56,880 --> 01:34:00,439
they sort of attach, usually some sort of vast assumption

1627
01:34:00,680 --> 01:34:04,479
to the so called evidence, which in many cases is

1628
01:34:04,640 --> 01:34:06,079
I would argue, pretty minuscule.

1629
01:34:08,920 --> 01:34:11,479
Speaker 37: And see what you mean? How would you respond to

1630
01:34:11,520 --> 01:34:20,680
the notion that if we take different scientific fields, you know, astrology, biology, geology,

1631
01:34:20,760 --> 01:34:23,000
and then the sub fields of all of those different

1632
01:34:23,600 --> 01:34:24,159
lines of.

1633
01:34:24,079 --> 01:34:27,520
Speaker 3: Evidence astrology, and we take our.

1634
01:34:27,439 --> 01:34:30,720
Speaker 37: Working assumptions that we have for them presently astrology, and

1635
01:34:30,800 --> 01:34:33,039
stack all of the evidence together, it lines up.

1636
01:34:33,359 --> 01:34:39,840
Speaker 1: Bro Astrology is not a science, So I thought that

1637
01:34:39,960 --> 01:34:41,840
was going to be like a scientism man, and he's

1638
01:34:41,840 --> 01:34:48,880
over Henna talking about astrology, Mars monkey.

1639
01:34:50,000 --> 01:34:54,800
Speaker 23: I need an alien huh, I need an alien yo.

1640
01:34:55,239 --> 01:34:59,239
Top up long of the year right there. It would

1641
01:34:59,239 --> 01:35:02,600
overthrow any people's heads. People have to look up I

1642
01:35:02,640 --> 01:35:03,960
need an alien on YouTube.

1643
01:35:05,119 --> 01:35:06,920
Speaker 1: It's an overlooked cringe corp for sure.

1644
01:35:09,520 --> 01:35:11,920
Speaker 3: Question what do you.

1645
01:35:14,880 --> 01:35:15,119
Speaker 6: When?

1646
01:35:15,640 --> 01:35:18,520
Speaker 23: How do you use the argument or how do you

1647
01:35:18,640 --> 01:35:22,680
if I'm trying to bolster an argument using the church's.

1648
01:35:22,319 --> 01:35:24,439
Speaker 3: Age and how long we've.

1649
01:35:24,319 --> 01:35:27,560
Speaker 23: Been practicing the faith and consistently for all this time.

1650
01:35:28,239 --> 01:35:32,199
But if somebody just says if it's old, just because

1651
01:35:32,199 --> 01:35:33,319
it's oldest mean it's true.

1652
01:35:33,359 --> 01:35:34,319
Speaker 3: How do you frame it in.

1653
01:35:34,239 --> 01:35:36,039
Speaker 23: A way where it's still valid and you're not falling

1654
01:35:36,079 --> 01:35:36,880
into that fallacy?

1655
01:35:39,520 --> 01:35:43,159
Speaker 1: Well, again, it depends on the specific claim that you're refuting.

1656
01:35:43,199 --> 01:35:47,199
So if a Protestant said something like the Orthodox Church

1657
01:35:47,279 --> 01:35:49,720
isn't ancient, like, at that point it would be appropriate

1658
01:35:49,800 --> 01:35:52,600
to prove that it is ancient, that it is old.

1659
01:35:53,159 --> 01:35:56,840
But I do agree that just being old doesn't necessarily

1660
01:35:56,920 --> 01:36:00,479
prove anything because error is old and ancient. So so what.

1661
01:36:05,279 --> 01:36:11,199
Speaker 38: Yeah, Okay, one more I had for you was, I mean,

1662
01:36:11,199 --> 01:36:13,119
the way I would transform that argument would be to

1663
01:36:13,159 --> 01:36:16,000
say something like, it's not just a matter of being old,

1664
01:36:16,079 --> 01:36:19,239
but that you have to actually be in historical continuity

1665
01:36:19,279 --> 01:36:23,840
in every generation with the first century Church and.

1666
01:36:23,720 --> 01:36:28,159
Speaker 1: The Apostles, and that's what Apostolic succession is partly about.

1667
01:36:28,720 --> 01:36:30,520
So that's where I would take the argument. I wouldn't

1668
01:36:30,560 --> 01:36:33,760
try to argue that, well, we're old. I mean, so what.

1669
01:36:35,960 --> 01:36:36,439
Speaker 3: Got it?

1670
01:36:38,279 --> 01:36:42,239
Speaker 23: I remember this argument recently from my old Calvinis days,

1671
01:36:42,840 --> 01:36:44,279
and I remembered it.

1672
01:36:44,479 --> 01:36:45,520
Speaker 3: I wanted to hear how you.

1673
01:36:45,479 --> 01:36:50,520
Speaker 23: Would respond to someone who says, how do how can

1674
01:36:50,560 --> 01:36:53,800
you trust the writers of scripture if they didn't have

1675
01:36:53,880 --> 01:36:56,560
free will or if they yeah, if they didn't have

1676
01:36:56,600 --> 01:37:00,199
free will, Well.

1677
01:37:00,119 --> 01:37:01,600
Speaker 1: I don't understand how that relates to Calvin.

1678
01:37:02,640 --> 01:37:05,239
Speaker 23: Or rather, if they do have free will, how can

1679
01:37:05,279 --> 01:37:11,520
you trust that the scriptures weren't written in error or transcribed?

1680
01:37:11,880 --> 01:37:16,000
Speaker 1: Well, that assumes that that assumes that men aren't necessarily

1681
01:37:16,159 --> 01:37:19,560
going to sin or that they're going to, you know,

1682
01:37:20,359 --> 01:37:24,560
pervert the text. And we believe in synergy that the

1683
01:37:24,720 --> 01:37:27,840
human writers did use their mind and their will, but

1684
01:37:27,960 --> 01:37:31,439
they synergize and harmonize with the divine will. So there's

1685
01:37:31,439 --> 01:37:35,319
no it's not like God possessed them and that they

1686
01:37:35,359 --> 01:37:38,600
had no human interaction. I mean, the scripture is a

1687
01:37:38,680 --> 01:37:41,880
tribute the writings to the human beings that wrote them,

1688
01:37:42,279 --> 01:37:45,039
but also, as Peter says, under the direction and inspirational

1689
01:37:45,039 --> 01:37:50,640
Holy Spirit, we got the banana teen Emperor is here

1690
01:37:51,039 --> 01:37:59,000
to set us straight. What's up?

1691
01:38:01,159 --> 01:38:04,800
Speaker 3: Hello? Is this me? I just want to give you

1692
01:38:04,840 --> 01:38:06,000
the kings through the kingdom.

1693
01:38:06,319 --> 01:38:10,960
Speaker 39: I Protestant earlier was saying, because Banantheum was gone, there's

1694
01:38:11,000 --> 01:38:14,279
no orthodoxy right if you will be the king?

1695
01:38:14,279 --> 01:38:19,960
Speaker 1: Though, thank you, well again, it was just a weird argument,

1696
01:38:20,039 --> 01:38:22,159
So I may just changed the account. See that's what

1697
01:38:22,199 --> 01:38:24,359
I'm saying. Like people want me to unblock these people

1698
01:38:24,439 --> 01:38:26,920
for entertainment value, but like every time there's somebody that

1699
01:38:26,960 --> 01:38:28,319
I blocked, it was for good reason.

1700
01:38:31,000 --> 01:38:35,039
Speaker 3: Uh yeah. But seriously, I have a question about.

1701
01:38:34,760 --> 01:38:38,079
Speaker 39: Like the Vine liturgy, and you know, you were previously

1702
01:38:38,119 --> 01:38:40,840
a trad cat for a little while, and I was

1703
01:38:40,840 --> 01:38:46,399
wondering if there was anything around the change of the

1704
01:38:46,479 --> 01:38:50,279
Novus Ordo and like post Vatican two, like that went

1705
01:38:50,520 --> 01:38:53,279
against cannons that said you shouldn't change liturgy or anything

1706
01:38:53,319 --> 01:38:55,359
like that, because it just I've been to both masses

1707
01:38:55,399 --> 01:38:57,880
and the lack of reverence just makes me just like

1708
01:38:58,359 --> 01:38:59,319
unconvinced by.

1709
01:38:59,159 --> 01:38:59,960
Speaker 3: Walking in the doors.

1710
01:39:00,079 --> 01:39:02,199
Speaker 1: Well, I mean, every trad cat will immediately argue that

1711
01:39:02,279 --> 01:39:08,920
Pius the Fifth's uh dogmatic statement about the unalterable tridentine

1712
01:39:09,079 --> 01:39:11,640
mass was violated by Vatican two.

1713
01:39:13,600 --> 01:39:19,520
Speaker 22: Oh okay, interesting, what about other little things of liturgical practice,

1714
01:39:19,600 --> 01:39:22,960
like the what's the name for when they face ad orientum?

1715
01:39:23,479 --> 01:39:24,680
Speaker 3: Is that the term.

1716
01:39:24,640 --> 01:39:25,119
Speaker 1: To the east?

1717
01:39:27,159 --> 01:39:29,159
Speaker 3: No, when they face in Roman.

1718
01:39:29,960 --> 01:39:31,880
Speaker 1: Is to the east. You're talking about facing the people?

1719
01:39:32,680 --> 01:39:33,840
Speaker 3: Yeah, what is that term again?

1720
01:39:35,920 --> 01:39:38,199
Speaker 1: Add popular? I don't know, I don't know.

1721
01:39:38,279 --> 01:39:41,560
Speaker 39: Yeah, but they started facing it away or towards the people.

1722
01:39:41,560 --> 01:39:45,479
Speaker 1: I would say, yeah, that's that's a Protestant influence on

1723
01:39:46,760 --> 01:39:50,359
the liturgy. Okay, interesting, I was just you know, did

1724
01:39:50,399 --> 01:39:55,640
you know they brought in Protestant Lutheran liturgist to help

1725
01:39:55,720 --> 01:39:56,720
craft the Novasorto?

1726
01:39:58,960 --> 01:40:01,239
Speaker 3: How specifically? Did not? I know that? That's kind of hilarious.

1727
01:40:01,319 --> 01:40:03,680
Speaker 1: Yeah, no, it's his own record. It's not a conspiracy there,

1728
01:40:03,680 --> 01:40:09,399
it's really true. Let me, I'm gonna get you the

1729
01:40:09,479 --> 01:40:15,359
name of the trender. If it's a bull, Uh, it

1730
01:40:15,439 --> 01:40:26,279
is quote primum. Yeah, so that is Pius the fifth supposed.

1731
01:40:26,680 --> 01:40:26,840
Speaker 3: Uh.

1732
01:40:27,680 --> 01:40:31,840
Speaker 1: Every trade cat will say that, every true trade cat

1733
01:40:31,880 --> 01:40:35,000
will say that this was the papal bull that said

1734
01:40:35,000 --> 01:40:37,840
that you had to use in all Latin rites the

1735
01:40:38,199 --> 01:40:42,000
tridentine missile, and that it's not supposed to be altered.

1736
01:40:42,039 --> 01:40:46,279
It is quote in perpetuity. So that's what the trade

1737
01:40:46,319 --> 01:40:47,119
cats will appoint to.

1738
01:40:48,800 --> 01:40:50,279
Speaker 3: And what's the justification from that?

1739
01:40:50,479 --> 01:40:53,239
Speaker 39: And then I remember there was something I forget which

1740
01:40:53,279 --> 01:40:55,680
povid was but changed the direction of the cross.

1741
01:40:56,560 --> 01:41:00,279
Speaker 1: What's the destigation hold on? What's the dessication for what?

1742
01:41:00,279 --> 01:41:02,760
Speaker 39: What's the justification for the fact that one pope said

1743
01:41:02,840 --> 01:41:05,279
never change the direction, and then there was a future

1744
01:41:05,319 --> 01:41:06,319
one that changed the direction.

1745
01:41:06,399 --> 01:41:13,039
Speaker 1: That the popes can revise and change their predecessors pronouncements, but.

1746
01:41:13,079 --> 01:41:16,760
Speaker 3: They're infallible about safe and morals.

1747
01:41:16,880 --> 01:41:23,079
Speaker 1: Who knows. Maybe just just believe it, dude. It doesn't

1748
01:41:23,119 --> 01:41:24,439
have to make it doesn't have to make sense.

1749
01:41:24,520 --> 01:41:26,720
Speaker 39: You do have a question about the rosary in all seriousness,

1750
01:41:26,720 --> 01:41:29,880
because I do pray like the Jesus Prayer on a rope,

1751
01:41:30,760 --> 01:41:34,600
but I've heard that some Eastern Orthodox do pray obviously

1752
01:41:34,640 --> 01:41:38,079
the Hail Mary because it is biblical. I mean, the

1753
01:41:38,359 --> 01:41:40,560
whole goal is just not that to be imagined if correct.

1754
01:41:41,600 --> 01:41:44,000
Speaker 1: Yeah, I don't think the problem is the problem is

1755
01:41:44,039 --> 01:41:47,880
not the statements themselves. But I mean, it's kind of like,

1756
01:41:48,439 --> 01:41:51,840
what's the point of digging through all the Roman Catholic

1757
01:41:51,920 --> 01:41:54,640
specific things to try to find the things that are

1758
01:41:54,640 --> 01:41:57,840
somewhat Orthodox or amenable to Orthodox? Like, ohle mindset just

1759
01:41:57,880 --> 01:42:01,720
doesn't make sense, and it's almost all always used by

1760
01:42:02,000 --> 01:42:06,319
acuminous minded people. And the other thing is that using

1761
01:42:06,359 --> 01:42:09,680
the rosary and promoting the Rosary gives the impression and

1762
01:42:09,760 --> 01:42:13,800
suggests that Saint Dominic is a saint as well, and

1763
01:42:13,920 --> 01:42:17,199
because he was, Mary gave the Rosary to Saint Dominic.

1764
01:42:17,560 --> 01:42:20,079
It just suggests all these Roman Catholics things, the Catholic

1765
01:42:20,199 --> 01:42:22,680
things that we wouldn't affirm. I don't. I don't believe

1766
01:42:22,720 --> 01:42:26,359
that Mary gave the Rosary to Dominic, But if I

1767
01:42:26,600 --> 01:42:30,199
follow and do the Rosary, it implicitly suggests that, oh well,

1768
01:42:30,199 --> 01:42:31,800
we're all in the same page. We all believe, you know,

1769
01:42:31,920 --> 01:42:37,119
Saint Dominic was cool, and we don't believe that, gotcha.

1770
01:42:37,239 --> 01:42:39,680
Speaker 3: Yeah, that's fair, all right. I just wanted to give

1771
01:42:39,680 --> 01:42:40,720
you the keys.

1772
01:42:40,479 --> 01:42:42,520
Speaker 1: And thank you for you and thank you. That was

1773
01:42:42,560 --> 01:42:58,359
the banana Tine Emperor Augustine, Augustin Augustin, thank you guys,

1774
01:42:58,439 --> 01:43:07,760
hit like and share what's up man, I'm mute, all right,

1775
01:43:07,960 --> 01:43:17,640
he can't connect. Well, we're uh widowing it down, tim

1776
01:43:18,039 --> 01:43:24,359
whittling it down, Widow, not whittling it down, Timothy, Tim

1777
01:43:24,439 --> 01:43:29,920
or Timothy? What's up? I'm seventy five years old. For

1778
01:43:29,960 --> 01:43:41,439
those that are wondering, are you there, tim we can't

1779
01:43:41,479 --> 01:43:45,199
hear you trying to turn your mic on seth.

1780
01:43:46,079 --> 01:43:47,039
Speaker 19: Hey, how's it going?

1781
01:43:47,119 --> 01:43:50,439
Speaker 3: Can you hear me? Yes, sir, sweet I just had

1782
01:43:50,439 --> 01:43:55,199
a couple quick things. This is from a.

1783
01:43:56,640 --> 01:43:58,359
Speaker 40: I guess I've got a couple of questions from a

1784
01:43:58,399 --> 01:44:04,920
Protestant perspective. I've got some people who have questions for

1785
01:44:05,079 --> 01:44:08,039
me because I'm actually, I don't know if you remember,

1786
01:44:08,159 --> 01:44:11,880
I'm the Lutheran, but I'm actually going to my local

1787
01:44:11,960 --> 01:44:14,079
ro core right now and I'm becoming a cat Ofcuman.

1788
01:44:14,119 --> 01:44:18,760
But there's some there's some stuff it's hard to I

1789
01:44:18,800 --> 01:44:20,600
guess addressed with certain people.

1790
01:44:21,840 --> 01:44:23,720
Speaker 19: So I guess I'm gonna argue from their perspective.

1791
01:44:23,880 --> 01:44:24,319
Speaker 1: Okay.

1792
01:44:27,319 --> 01:44:29,640
Speaker 40: So one of the one of the big things that

1793
01:44:29,720 --> 01:44:33,720
I've I haven't really brought this up specifically because I'm

1794
01:44:33,760 --> 01:44:38,800
not sure exactly how to defend it, but I've heard

1795
01:44:38,800 --> 01:44:40,159
you say and I've heard a lot of people say

1796
01:44:40,159 --> 01:44:44,039
that the Bible is specifically a liturgical text, and that

1797
01:44:44,359 --> 01:44:47,720
devotional reading is good and fine, but that's not the

1798
01:44:47,760 --> 01:44:50,800
primary usage, which seems good and.

1799
01:44:51,119 --> 01:44:52,960
Speaker 19: Can correct from what I can tell.

1800
01:44:54,199 --> 01:44:58,119
Speaker 40: But I guess, in what sense would it be like

1801
01:44:58,560 --> 01:45:00,840
just read in a liturgy like that's the that's the

1802
01:45:00,840 --> 01:45:02,239
main purpose of it.

1803
01:45:02,439 --> 01:45:04,479
Speaker 3: How would you defend that specific view.

1804
01:45:08,359 --> 01:45:11,600
Speaker 1: I don't think that it's controversial. If you read liturgical

1805
01:45:11,800 --> 01:45:15,000
scholars or historians of liturgy, I think you'll find them

1806
01:45:15,119 --> 01:45:18,079
being pretty candid about that. I mentioned a couple of

1807
01:45:18,079 --> 01:45:21,720
books earlier that were Protestant books that helped me, uh,

1808
01:45:22,359 --> 01:45:24,560
get out of the soul scripture and mindset. One is

1809
01:45:24,680 --> 01:45:27,640
Formation Formation of the Christian Biblical Canon by Lee McDonald.

1810
01:45:27,720 --> 01:45:30,880
The other one is F. F. Brus's Canada Scripture. So

1811
01:45:31,039 --> 01:45:35,079
two pretty well known famous Protestant evangelical scholars that really

1812
01:45:35,880 --> 01:45:39,399
point out that you can't divorce the scriptures from their

1813
01:45:39,439 --> 01:45:42,439
liturgical setting a milieu. So uh. I think also the

1814
01:45:42,479 --> 01:45:45,840
Hebrew tradition is part of this as well. I mean,

1815
01:45:45,880 --> 01:45:49,279
certainly you could meditate on God's Law Dan Knight, but

1816
01:45:49,560 --> 01:45:53,279
David psalms for example, are written to be sung in

1817
01:45:53,520 --> 01:45:56,319
the liturgical worship of God at the temple or the

1818
01:45:56,359 --> 01:46:00,520
Tabernacle or wherever. So you know, that's the purpose of them.

1819
01:46:00,800 --> 01:46:03,239
You would hear the hearing of the law. Faith comes

1820
01:46:03,279 --> 01:46:04,399
by hearing here by the word of God.

1821
01:46:04,479 --> 01:46:04,640
Speaker 18: Right.

1822
01:46:05,000 --> 01:46:08,039
Speaker 1: Uh, the hearing of the law would be done by

1823
01:46:08,079 --> 01:46:10,119
the priest. It would be interpreted by the priest the

1824
01:46:10,159 --> 01:46:14,159
synagogue system, right, that's a liturgical setting as well. And

1825
01:46:14,199 --> 01:46:17,680
so just the entire ethos of the Hebrew tradition is

1826
01:46:17,720 --> 01:46:20,760
not about your you know n IV study Bible in

1827
01:46:20,800 --> 01:46:24,239
the park next to the you know, to the oak

1828
01:46:24,319 --> 01:46:25,000
tree or whatever.

1829
01:46:25,479 --> 01:46:27,399
Speaker 40: Yeah, if I could, if I could just jump in

1830
01:46:27,439 --> 01:46:28,199
there really quick too.

1831
01:46:28,640 --> 01:46:30,520
Speaker 3: I think obviously when.

1832
01:46:30,399 --> 01:46:34,319
Speaker 40: Jesus says that to the Pharisees that you search the

1833
01:46:34,399 --> 01:46:37,000
text because you think it is in them that they

1834
01:46:37,039 --> 01:46:39,199
have eternal life, I think it actually applies really well

1835
01:46:39,239 --> 01:46:40,439
to the products mindset.

1836
01:46:40,720 --> 01:46:42,399
Speaker 1: Absolutely. I cite that all the time.

1837
01:46:43,760 --> 01:46:46,479
Speaker 40: Yeah, And so I guess that's like I've I've been

1838
01:46:46,520 --> 01:46:48,359
out of the soul in scriptori mindset for a while

1839
01:46:48,359 --> 01:46:50,560
and I've just been kind of wrestling with certain with

1840
01:46:50,680 --> 01:46:52,000
certain questions before.

1841
01:46:51,760 --> 01:46:54,800
Speaker 1: I Yeah, I would say, uh, you know, get a

1842
01:46:54,840 --> 01:47:00,000
book like the Williams and Anstall book on the Orthodox Littery,

1843
01:47:00,439 --> 01:47:03,960
and then get Hugh Weiber's book Byzantine Liturgy, because Weiber

1844
01:47:04,119 --> 01:47:06,880
is a Protestant, he's an Anglican and he wrote a

1845
01:47:06,880 --> 01:47:09,039
really good book on the history of that Byzantine Liturgy,

1846
01:47:09,079 --> 01:47:11,560
which you know, for example, the first few chapters refused

1847
01:47:11,760 --> 01:47:16,079
Gavin Ortland because he talks about imagery and the you know,

1848
01:47:16,199 --> 01:47:18,680
the structure of the church with an altar and all that.

1849
01:47:18,840 --> 01:47:21,119
I mean, well, that's if that's the early Church, then

1850
01:47:21,159 --> 01:47:23,960
I mean Protestantism is not true because they're having altars,

1851
01:47:24,880 --> 01:47:28,680
which are eucharistic altars. Altars are where you do sacrifice.

1852
01:47:29,319 --> 01:47:32,560
That's not a table Protestants.

1853
01:47:34,239 --> 01:47:41,319
Speaker 41: Spencer Coo uh huh, Hey yeah, Jay.

1854
01:47:41,159 --> 01:47:42,880
Speaker 3: So I was wanting to ask a question.

1855
01:47:43,359 --> 01:47:47,600
Speaker 41: I've been studying a lot of Greg Bonson and Cornelis

1856
01:47:47,680 --> 01:47:52,119
van Hill from a Protestant perspective. That's all I've really known,

1857
01:47:52,239 --> 01:47:55,159
and I understand that you are familiar with those works

1858
01:47:55,199 --> 01:47:58,319
as well. So I wanted to ask the question, what

1859
01:47:58,359 --> 01:48:02,880
do you think about the presuppositionalism of also Gordon Clark.

1860
01:48:03,239 --> 01:48:04,840
Speaker 3: Are you familiar with him?

1861
01:48:05,760 --> 01:48:07,680
Speaker 1: Yeah? I read a couple of Clark things back in

1862
01:48:07,720 --> 01:48:11,359
the day. But I always sided with Van Till over Clark,

1863
01:48:11,760 --> 01:48:14,520
especially when you get into this idea that the Logos

1864
01:48:14,640 --> 01:48:17,439
is a bunch of propositions, the Bible is a set

1865
01:48:17,439 --> 01:48:20,039
of propositions. I think that, oh, that's just completely stupid.

1866
01:48:21,199 --> 01:48:24,880
Speaker 41: Sure, yeah, I really think is empiricism. His critique on

1867
01:48:24,920 --> 01:48:28,159
empiricism quite well, and I think Van Till and everyone

1868
01:48:28,319 --> 01:48:30,840
like Bonsan would agree with him. But at the end

1869
01:48:30,840 --> 01:48:32,720
of the day, I think he ended up concluding that

1870
01:48:32,800 --> 01:48:35,439
you don't get knowledge by sense perception. The only thing

1871
01:48:35,479 --> 01:48:38,880
you could know is from scripture. Just kind of interesting.

1872
01:48:39,520 --> 01:48:41,680
Speaker 1: I think you would if I remember. That sounds like

1873
01:48:41,760 --> 01:48:42,680
what he would argue.

1874
01:48:43,119 --> 01:48:45,800
Speaker 41: Yeah, that is a that was I was just curious

1875
01:48:45,840 --> 01:48:48,520
if you heard anything from Gordon Clark. I asked Jim

1876
01:48:48,560 --> 01:48:50,960
Bob this while back, and he seemed like he didn't

1877
01:48:50,960 --> 01:48:52,159
know anything about Gordon.

1878
01:48:53,279 --> 01:48:53,399
Speaker 3: Uh.

1879
01:48:53,520 --> 01:48:56,840
Speaker 1: Now, Jim Bob didn't have like a Calvinist you know,

1880
01:48:58,159 --> 01:49:02,680
uh upbringing or or time. I was really into that

1881
01:49:02,720 --> 01:49:06,800
for a long time. But I remember reading this one thing,

1882
01:49:06,840 --> 01:49:09,399
Hammer of the Heretics by Gordon Clark or something like that.

1883
01:49:09,479 --> 01:49:13,800
I remember reading God's Word that's it, And I read

1884
01:49:14,119 --> 01:49:18,680
his critique event Hill. But the rest of it I

1885
01:49:18,680 --> 01:49:25,640
think is pretty silly, honestly, But thank you for your comment. Interference.

1886
01:49:25,680 --> 01:49:26,039
Speaker 3: What's up?

1887
01:49:28,279 --> 01:49:30,119
Speaker 1: We have an altar from which those who serve the

1888
01:49:30,119 --> 01:49:34,600
tabernacle no right to eat. Here's Paul calling the eucharistic

1889
01:49:34,800 --> 01:49:41,119
offering an altar that we eat from. And he's contrasting

1890
01:49:41,199 --> 01:49:44,319
the bodies of the animals with the body and blood

1891
01:49:44,319 --> 01:49:49,560
of Christ on our altar, and that we are sanctified

1892
01:49:49,600 --> 01:49:58,680
by Christ's eucharistic blood offering. What's up, man, interference? What's up?

1893
01:50:02,520 --> 01:50:07,279
Speaker 3: Oh? Hello, Jay? You believe that God can only know

1894
01:50:07,359 --> 01:50:08,079
all truths?

1895
01:50:09,520 --> 01:50:09,680
Speaker 19: Right?

1896
01:50:09,720 --> 01:50:11,279
Speaker 1: You're asking them? So you want to ask the same

1897
01:50:11,319 --> 01:50:12,359
guy's question earlier?

1898
01:50:16,239 --> 01:50:16,840
Speaker 3: Excuse me?

1899
01:50:17,479 --> 01:50:19,119
Speaker 1: Are you in here for the other guy that was

1900
01:50:19,159 --> 01:50:20,039
doing this earlier.

1901
01:50:20,520 --> 01:50:21,319
Speaker 3: I want to hear this.

1902
01:50:21,399 --> 01:50:26,279
Speaker 2: I want to hear what the argument is from.

1903
01:50:26,399 --> 01:50:26,560
Speaker 3: Yeah.

1904
01:50:26,560 --> 01:50:28,319
Speaker 25: I don't know what you're referencing, Jay, but I just

1905
01:50:28,359 --> 01:50:30,600
want to know if you take it that God only

1906
01:50:30,640 --> 01:50:33,199
knows all truths, you can't know falsehoods.

1907
01:50:34,399 --> 01:50:38,439
Speaker 1: Uh? Well, knowing falsehoods would be propositions that he would

1908
01:50:38,680 --> 01:50:39,479
potentially know.

1909
01:50:39,760 --> 01:50:45,920
Speaker 25: Sure, so would he know the proposition that this statement

1910
01:50:45,960 --> 01:50:46,520
is not true?

1911
01:50:46,680 --> 01:50:46,840
Speaker 3: Jay?

1912
01:50:48,640 --> 01:50:52,479
Speaker 1: Why are you repeating my name with that. Yes, if

1913
01:50:52,479 --> 01:50:54,439
we can know a proposition, God can know it. But

1914
01:50:54,479 --> 01:50:56,399
I don't think that God's mode of knowing is the

1915
01:50:56,399 --> 01:50:57,720
same as the human mode of knowing.

1916
01:51:00,119 --> 01:51:00,680
Speaker 3: God knows.

1917
01:51:00,800 --> 01:51:03,600
Speaker 36: If God knows all truths and falsehoods, then what about

1918
01:51:03,600 --> 01:51:05,560
the statement that this statement is not true?

1919
01:51:05,800 --> 01:51:14,880
Speaker 1: Yeah, God knows paradoxes as well. That's a paradox. What's

1920
01:51:14,920 --> 01:51:17,199
wrong with saying God knows paradoxes but his mode of

1921
01:51:17,239 --> 01:51:18,199
knowing is not ours?

1922
01:51:20,600 --> 01:51:22,359
Speaker 3: Well, the problem is would it be true or false

1923
01:51:22,399 --> 01:51:23,159
that he knows it.

1924
01:51:23,159 --> 01:51:25,359
Speaker 1: It's a false dichotomy because it's a paradox.

1925
01:51:25,439 --> 01:51:25,600
Speaker 9: Read.

1926
01:51:29,800 --> 01:51:32,439
Speaker 1: So he just repeats your name, that's what That's what

1927
01:51:32,479 --> 01:51:38,720
these people do. Say it again. Probably didn't go.

1928
01:51:40,279 --> 01:51:42,439
Speaker 3: And meta language like these aren't gods.

1929
01:51:42,560 --> 01:51:49,079
Speaker 1: Dude, Yes, thank you your ignorance. He just wanted to

1930
01:51:49,119 --> 01:51:52,399
repeat my name because they know that. That's and then

1931
01:51:52,760 --> 01:51:54,840
they repeat the name and then when I boot them,

1932
01:51:54,880 --> 01:51:56,640
they'll say, they'll go clip that put it on their

1933
01:51:56,680 --> 01:51:59,640
channel that I ran bald Man's opinion.

1934
01:52:08,319 --> 01:52:09,159
Speaker 3: Hello, O can you hear me?

1935
01:52:11,359 --> 01:52:12,399
Speaker 1: Yeah?

1936
01:52:12,520 --> 01:52:16,800
Speaker 3: Hey, how's it going. I've never been on one of

1937
01:52:16,840 --> 01:52:20,479
these before, so they're like an allotted time or something

1938
01:52:20,680 --> 01:52:22,520
or uh.

1939
01:52:22,520 --> 01:52:24,920
Speaker 1: No, what are you? You have an argument or what

1940
01:52:24,960 --> 01:52:26,279
do you? What's up? What's on your mind?

1941
01:52:27,279 --> 01:52:27,479
Speaker 3: Well?

1942
01:52:27,680 --> 01:52:30,479
Speaker 42: Uh, I don't know much about you, but I got

1943
01:52:30,560 --> 01:52:35,560
sent here by Rachel Wilson's saying Protestants or Baptist or whatever.

1944
01:52:35,920 --> 01:52:37,680
Speaker 3: Should come to you, should come to you if they

1945
01:52:37,720 --> 01:52:42,720
want to talk to somebody who's Orthodox. Cath Are you orthodox? Okay?

1946
01:52:43,439 --> 01:52:48,359
Speaker 42: So yeah, yeah, sorry, I had to run away, get the.

1947
01:52:49,840 --> 01:52:52,520
Speaker 3: Run away to a private room.

1948
01:52:52,920 --> 01:52:57,760
Speaker 42: So I have a contention about I think most Orthodox

1949
01:52:57,880 --> 01:52:59,640
or Catholics don't believe.

1950
01:52:59,359 --> 01:53:03,159
Speaker 3: That salvation is by grace through faith, and I make the.

1951
01:53:04,439 --> 01:53:05,720
Speaker 7: I'm gonna make the claim that it is.

1952
01:53:07,399 --> 01:53:10,520
Speaker 1: Based on Well, we believe that it is, but we

1953
01:53:10,600 --> 01:53:13,159
believe that those words mean different things from you. So

1954
01:53:13,239 --> 01:53:15,560
it's not that we reject the scriptures or don't believe

1955
01:53:15,560 --> 01:53:18,399
in salvation by faith or by grace, but we don't

1956
01:53:18,439 --> 01:53:22,439
believe that it's a legal standing that's imputational, which is

1957
01:53:22,479 --> 01:53:28,720
based on a heretical trinitarian theology, like.

1958
01:53:28,640 --> 01:53:32,279
Speaker 3: A legal standing. The word justified is a legal term,

1959
01:53:32,359 --> 01:53:32,640
is it not?

1960
01:53:32,920 --> 01:53:36,359
Speaker 1: Yeah, but it's not a purely fictional imputational legal standing.

1961
01:53:36,399 --> 01:53:38,640
That's what I'm saying is impossible because nobody in the

1962
01:53:38,640 --> 01:53:42,159
ancient medieval world were nominalists, and you need nominalism to

1963
01:53:42,199 --> 01:53:42,920
have that position.

1964
01:53:46,600 --> 01:53:47,960
Speaker 3: What do you mean by nominalists?

1965
01:53:48,079 --> 01:53:48,520
Speaker 5: Sorry?

1966
01:53:49,159 --> 01:53:53,239
Speaker 1: Right, So the reformers like Luther relied on medieval nominalists

1967
01:53:53,359 --> 01:53:55,640
like Akham and Bile to figure out how it was

1968
01:53:55,680 --> 01:53:57,960
possible for God to declare people to be a legal

1969
01:53:58,000 --> 01:54:01,880
state that they weren't ontologically that thing. So that's nominalism.

1970
01:54:01,920 --> 01:54:05,239
That it's a name only position, a legal standing position

1971
01:54:05,279 --> 01:54:08,319
that doesn't reflect an actual ontological change in the being.

1972
01:54:08,840 --> 01:54:10,640
And since nobody in the ancient image of the world

1973
01:54:10,880 --> 01:54:15,079
were nominalists until Aukham, that means Paul didn't teach your view.

1974
01:54:18,760 --> 01:54:22,239
Speaker 3: Doesn't it say? Everyone's four to five? That's let's see,

1975
01:54:22,319 --> 01:54:23,079
let me call it up here.

1976
01:54:23,840 --> 01:54:25,920
Speaker 1: So you're not gonna address what I said. You're gonna blow.

1977
01:54:25,800 --> 01:54:26,239
Speaker 2: Past you know.

1978
01:54:26,560 --> 01:54:28,680
Speaker 3: I'm trying. I'm trying to understand what you're saying. I'm

1979
01:54:28,680 --> 01:54:29,600
not trying to ignore it.

1980
01:54:32,039 --> 01:54:36,560
Speaker 1: Have you read Alistair McGrath? No, what is that funny?

1981
01:54:36,560 --> 01:54:37,279
I don't understand.

1982
01:54:37,800 --> 01:54:40,239
Speaker 3: No, I'm just I'm not laughing at you. I'm just saying, no,

1983
01:54:40,359 --> 01:54:41,039
I haven't.

1984
01:54:41,319 --> 01:54:44,000
Speaker 1: Well, but you laughed, so I don't understand why it's funny.

1985
01:54:44,920 --> 01:54:47,560
Speaker 3: I don't. I don't know it. Just chuckle, dude. Okay,

1986
01:54:47,960 --> 01:54:50,000
I'm a little I've never done one of these before,

1987
01:54:50,079 --> 01:54:52,000
so it's a bit new to me. Maybe more of

1988
01:54:52,039 --> 01:54:52,760
a nervous laughter.

1989
01:54:53,000 --> 01:54:56,000
Speaker 1: Okay. Well, McGrath is one of the most famous modern

1990
01:54:56,039 --> 01:54:59,199
Oxford Protestant scholars. He wrote a book called Eustacia Day

1991
01:54:59,239 --> 01:55:01,960
and in that book admits that nobody in the ancient

1992
01:55:02,039 --> 01:55:05,359
medieval world until about fifteen hundreds had the idea of

1993
01:55:05,720 --> 01:55:07,079
justification by faith alone.

1994
01:55:08,319 --> 01:55:12,039
Speaker 42: Okay, let me pull up some quotes here, then, didn't

1995
01:55:12,520 --> 01:55:14,239
let me fall some quotes with some church fathers.

1996
01:55:14,279 --> 01:55:17,920
Speaker 1: Okay, Yeah, church fathers who believe in appisodic succession and

1997
01:55:17,960 --> 01:55:22,039
the real presence. You think they taught justification faith. Pull on,

1998
01:55:23,520 --> 01:55:25,680
You're going to pull up a bunch of quote minds

1999
01:55:25,720 --> 01:55:28,960
that don't say what I'm saying. They say what you

2000
01:55:29,000 --> 01:55:31,039
think they're saying. So you're going to read into these

2001
01:55:31,159 --> 01:55:33,640
church fathers who also teach the necessity of works and

2002
01:55:33,680 --> 01:55:35,800
they use the real presence. You're going to try to

2003
01:55:35,880 --> 01:55:42,640
quote mind them to prove the Protestant doctrines. Okay, I

2004
01:55:42,720 --> 01:55:44,159
used to be a Protestant, dude, I did all this.

2005
01:55:44,239 --> 01:55:46,920
Don't you think I know what you're going to do?

2006
01:55:47,279 --> 01:55:48,199
Speaker 3: What do you you mean?

2007
01:55:48,560 --> 01:55:51,039
Speaker 23: I'm just trying to put out a position here and

2008
01:55:52,119 --> 01:55:53,520
I don't I don't.

2009
01:55:53,319 --> 01:55:55,840
Speaker 1: Know, like I'm not particularly the Romans for Let's go

2010
01:55:55,840 --> 01:55:58,600
to Romans for when Paul who does? Where does Paul

2011
01:55:58,720 --> 01:56:00,880
site in general? Assistant Romans for.

2012
01:56:02,520 --> 01:56:06,439
Speaker 42: Okay, let's just read it here, Romans for three four?

2013
01:56:07,119 --> 01:56:10,119
What say the scripture Abraham believed God and it was kind.

2014
01:56:09,960 --> 01:56:11,199
Speaker 3: Of him for righteous? Yes?

2015
01:56:11,359 --> 01:56:13,159
Speaker 1: Where is he citing a.

2016
01:56:13,239 --> 01:56:16,640
Speaker 3: Romans death Genesis chapter fifteen, verses three.

2017
01:56:16,920 --> 01:56:19,760
Speaker 1: Six, Right, Now, tell me this in the Protestant view

2018
01:56:20,600 --> 01:56:23,359
in terms of the transition from rath to grace, as

2019
01:56:23,359 --> 01:56:26,880
the Reformer spoke of, When was that in Abraham's.

2020
01:56:26,359 --> 01:56:30,680
Speaker 42: Life Genesis chapter fifteen when it says he believed God?

2021
01:56:30,880 --> 01:56:33,680
Speaker 1: Ah, thank you for refuting. Yes, thank you for reputing,

2022
01:56:34,199 --> 01:56:38,479
Thank you for refuting Protestantism, because it's just it's Genesis

2023
01:56:38,520 --> 01:56:42,600
twelve where Abraham first believes and does several chapters of

2024
01:56:42,640 --> 01:56:46,199
good works before Genesis fifteen. So you just refuted Protestantism

2025
01:56:46,199 --> 01:56:46,920
in Romans.

2026
01:56:46,640 --> 01:56:51,399
Speaker 3: For No, because you read you read the rest of

2027
01:56:51,399 --> 01:56:55,520
the chapter. It's talking about Genesis chapter fifteen or so.

2028
01:56:55,560 --> 01:56:58,640
Speaker 1: You literally heard nothing I said, and you're not addressing area.

2029
01:56:58,680 --> 01:57:02,039
You don't even understand the argument, You're you're blowing past

2030
01:57:02,159 --> 01:57:02,760
the argument.

2031
01:57:04,039 --> 01:57:06,560
Speaker 3: May maybe I'm just not quite getting with you right.

2032
01:57:06,479 --> 01:57:10,119
Speaker 1: You're not correct. Do you want me to state it again? Sure,

2033
01:57:10,960 --> 01:57:15,399
the transition from wrath to grace should be Genesis twelve,

2034
01:57:16,079 --> 01:57:20,920
not fifteen. So by Paul citing Genesis fifteen, you refute

2035
01:57:21,439 --> 01:57:22,920
the Protestant position.

2036
01:57:26,279 --> 01:57:28,439
Speaker 3: I'm sorry, I don't follow that because