Hello Andrew!! But the term begotten means to come from something right? Unless i'm misunderstanding... How can something be "eternally begotten" from the Father? Doesn't that rationally contradict itself? No disrespect intended, the phrasing just seems completely contradictory to us... Thanks for your comment! -Hamza
@@MuslimMindsUS Well, when discussing the nature of omnipotence we do run into these questions. But the idea is that since it is literally God who is all-powerful or omnipotent he can do things which we find to be contradictory. I see the square circle argument a lot to criticize the contradictory nature of the trinity but it doesn’t apply because God is fully capable of creating a square circle because he is all-powerful. So for God, it would be possible for him to be eternally begotten of himself.
@@MuslimMindsUS in this case begotten means "sent" the Father sends Christ to earth, and from the Father procedes the holy spirit, but all 3 are Eternal, and equal. This is the orthadox view, while Catholicism has the Holy spirit procede from both Father and son, it's complicated, but both achieve the same theology in the end.
@@MuslimMindsUS understand his comment. He said, they did not come into being. They were with the father always. Read the creed. It says begotten not made, god from god, light from light, consubstantial with the father.
@@MuslimMindsUS The eternal begetting of the Son and the procession of the Holy Spirit are not to be understood as temporal events (as time and space weren't even created yet) but as causal events. So the Father is the reason behind the Son and Holy Spirit, not like an ancestor that existed at an earlier point in time.
Bullshit. The church has the right to make appropriate changes that do not take away the original idea. The magisterium of the church decides, not you.
2:39 Jesus was resurrected on Sunday. Jews at the time had been used to Shabbat from sundown Friday to sundown Saturday. Celebrating the Sabbath on Saturday was ended. The Lord’s Day became Sunday. The pope knew this, but many people were confused during the evangelization process. Some began teaching heresy. The council sought to clarify the truth for everyone.
The Great Schism had started a few decades before the coming of Muhammad. But when the Rashidun and Umayyad Caliphates have started to conquer parts of Europe , such as the Iberian peninsula, Sicily and Cyprus, the Byzantines asked the Western (christian) kingdoms for help. The West told the Byzantines that unless they do not accept their reforms suggestions, they will not be helped. And so, the Byzantine Empire lost the modern-day lands of Syria, Liban, Israel, Palestine, Cyprus and Northern Africa. (This is - I think - the biggest reason for why the crusades, even though the crusades were of the catholics, existed in the first place.) And that is also a great observation of what non-believes Muhammad and his sucessors were referring to. The Great Schism ended three centuries later, in 1054. It was a slow split-up. A painful split-up for us Catholic and Orthodox Christians.
7:24 The "East" didn't "use Greek translations". The original text of the new testament is in Greek. Those videos you react to are really not that good.
3:33 The original Apostles’ Creed is correct and true, but it is light on details compared to the Nicene Creed. The Apostles’ Creed simply says, “I believe in the Holy Ghost.” The Nicene Creed inserted a few needed clarifying details that had since been revealed by God via Divine Grace. These clarifications (they weren’t dogmatic changes to the faith) were needed, especially in the East.
So actually I saw you got confused with Arianism which the belief of the Father creating the Son and the Holy Spirit which today is concidered a heresy Nicene Christianity which almost all branches are is that the Father, Son and Holy Spirit all three have always existed nobody created each other also Jesus is the Word of God that became Flesh and dwelled Among us (John 1)
They have “always” existed bc they’re outside of time, but the Father is the source of the other two. It’s kind of hard to explain/visualize lol. Peep the Nicene creed
From what I understand you are muslim. Trinitarian theology is not easy to explain so I'll try from the Orthodox perspective. God is one, incomprehensible and infinite. He is the first and last, He who exists creator and sustainer of all. God is unknown to humanity. All we know is by divine revelations in the holy scripts. According to these revelations (the Christian bible, this means the old testament or hebrew bible and the new testament), God exists in three persons. They all just exists within the one, they are equal and coexists in eternity. None of the persons came into being. I am not going into the specifics, it will take too long but i will surmise it like this. The son is the logos, the word of God. Just like the word of Allah was put in a book, the Quran, so the word of God was put in the human Jesus so to speak. The holy spirit, in Greek holy Pneuma, is the equivalent of the breath or wind of Allah. The holy spirit is the creative power of God. There are many more names of each of the persons ofc, for example you say in the video the Son of God but this person's divinity derives from the term Son of Man which appears in the prophecies of Daniel and Jesus identifies as, in the Gospels. In any case, initially the Christians had agreed in the Nicean creed that the holy spirit proceeds only from the father. After some centuries the Pope decides to alter the creed by adding "and the son". There were 2 issues here. 1st one the changing of the theology, the second was a question of authority, how could the Pope change something in the creed, since up to that point he was just another patriarch and not above the other 4 patriarchs (Constantinople, Alexandria, Jerusalem and Antioch). You have to understand that the ecumenical counsels took place mostly to address heresies, so for example the 2nd counsel, the one of Constantinople, did not change the creed, but added to it and the changes are accepted by both of what is now the Orthodox and Catholic church.
The conclusion you came to about the trinity are pretty close to how Arian Christians understood the whole thing. Eastern and Western churches don't believe that the Son or the Holy Spirit were created. At least according to what I know.
Hey v Eden, a few people have told us the same thing regarding Arian Christians. Very interesting information.. Please be sure to subscribe, lots more videos coming out soon :) Appreciate your comment! -Hamza
@@MuslimMindsUS The orthodox trinitarian view is that God the son is 'eternally begotten, not made' and the holy spirit is eternal with the father. They are all co equal, co eternal, and make 1 God, but, confusingly, they are not the same. The father, son, and spirit are distinct with distinct roles. Also jesus as God the son is 100 percent God and 100 percent man with his natures remaining distinct but he is only 1 person. Trinitarianism is confusing, that is why they call it a 'mystery'. There were wars fought over making sense of this.
So, to clear things up, Nicene creed of 325 included all three persons, it said: "I believe in one God, Father Almighty, Creator of heaven and earth, and of all things visible and invisible. And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the only-begotten Son of God, begotten of the Father before all ages; Light of Light, true God of true God, begotten, not created, of one essence with the Father through Whom all things were made. Who for us men and for our salvation came down from heaven and was incarnate of the Holy Spirit and the Virgin Mary and became man. He was crucified for us under Pontius Pilate, and suffered and was buried; And He rose on the third day, according to the Scriptures. He ascended into heaven and is seated at the right hand of the Father; And He will come again with glory to judge the living and dead. His kingdom shall have no end. And in the Holy Spirit" But, at Constantinople in 381, when fighting against heresy of Macedonianism, it was added: "(And in the Holy Spirit) the Lord, the Creator of life, Who proceeds from the Father, Who together with the Father and the Son is worshipped and glorified, Who spoke through the prophets. In one, holy, catholic, and apostolic Church. I confess one baptism for the forgiveness of sins. I look for the resurrection of the dead, and the life of the age to come" Latins added in 589 phrase 'and the Son'. And pope recited it for first time in 1014. Regarding Quatrodeciman issue, churches of Asia minor who are more tied to St John the Apostle celebrated Easter when Hebrews celebrate Passover, they started on Friday and it continued until Sunday. Other churches celebrated it on Sunday only and with different dating than Jews. It is important to note that there was no schism at start, St Polycarp, who was bishop of Smyrna and was Quatrodeciman, and St Anicetus who was bishop of Rome celebrated liturgy together when they tried to resolve the issue. Council of Nicea decreed that more common custom has to be followed universaly, for the sake of unity in celebrating Easter.
0:17 All three persons of God are co-equal and co-eternal. God the Son and God the Holy Ghost are not “creatures” as the angels and humans are. You two are asking AMAZING questions btw. Y’all have a very good grasp on Christian belief, but your thought process is corrupted by Protestants who chime in falsehoods. God bless you on you journey to God, understanding Him as the Triune God that He is. ♥️
If you want to start a fight, talk about the trinity. From a traditional chrisitian theology God has always existed, the trinity has always existed, the members of the trinity have always existed, they are distinct but unified, individuals but one, equal but different. It's complicated and I think you've thought more about it than most christians. There have always been christian groups who don't believe in the trinity and are normally labelled heretics. The Arians said Christ was created by the Father, the council of Nicea in this video was held to decide whether they were right. Jehovah's Witnesses believe something similar. The Unitarian church doesn't believe in the trinity. Mormons/Latter day Saints believe something else again. Don't know if this makes the arguments clearer. ua-cam.com/video/Yp2nyVsd6Ro/v-deo.html
It's easier to understand I find buy using the metaphor of a diamond. It has facets. We can say Aspect here. This may be a bit mystical but Jesus is more the perspective of human consciousness understanding from its own point of view. That is why the kingdom is within thee. God is totality of existence despite the perspective of human consciousness. That kind of vision or beatitude has a distinct revelation of non-human consciousness. The holy spirit is the perspective of a kind of two-headed beatitude. It is receiving the wisdom and grace without losing self-awareness or self-identity - as in - you maintain(for the most part) your continuous awareness while also being aware of the great mystery that is God.
An “ecumenical council”, historically is a council of the “all bishops of the church” as the church covered a large geographic area it became acceptable to send the decisions for bishops unable to attend to consent to, thus directly or indirectly western bishops agreed to the first council of Constantinople From what I’ve heard the fillioque was a result of the vestiges of Arianism which was most pervasive in the west of the empire even well after Nicaea 1 anathematized Arius and his followers. Ironically the same reason Constantinople 1 was held The original creed did not include the section about the procession of the persons of the trinity at all. The section modified with the fillioque was entirely original to Constantinople 1.
Why are so many words pronounced incorrectly in the video you showed? clearly not a very academic video. Also as so many others have mentioned begotten does not mean they have not always existed. C.S Lewis has good examples that can begin to explain this in a way you might understand in the book Mere Christianity.
Hey Coby, we noticed the mispronunciations as well, the video itself seemed pretty academic though, their whole channel is stuff like this. Okay, we can look into it, thanks for the info! -Hamza
Bro-tip: The words we use in english in our modern day and understanding are heavily contorted compared to their usage and meaning 'back in the day'. Like the word terrible. We use it now for a really potent form of 'bad'. But it's classically used to be something that creates a subservient form of terror, kind of like the wrath of a father when you're in trouble, or the roar of a massive storm or the shaking of a hungry earthquake. So at that juncture it would be best to check the original greek words from the Septuagint, Assyrian, or Hebrew words (if you can find it). Then using the shared(ish) alphabets, transliterate them into Arabic.
Terrible originally meant "to fill with fear", but in modern times it has come to mean "really bad". I'm not sure where you're getting "subservient form of terror, kind of like the wrath of a father when you're in trouble, or the roar of a massive storm or the shaking of a hungry earthquake". A good example of terrible in its early sense is in the epithet for Ivan the Terrible, he wasn't called that because he was an incompetent ruler but because he instilled fear. To read and understand the bible in English doesn't require you to learn multiple languages and transliterate to one but to learn the words in their proper context.
The Son and Holy Spirit didn't come "later on". Because that implies time and space, but the begetting of the Son and the breathing out of the Spirit are when space and time didn't exist. I understand it's hard to conceive of the Father begetting the Son because it seems to imply "one happened after another", but it's more proper to speaking of the Father always eternally having begotten the Son, and the Father and Son always eternally have breathing out the Spirit.
@@MuslimMindsUSthe way orthodox believe About the Trinity is imbalance.....is not Equal..... it's in a sense of Seperation....you cannot Seperate the Holy Trinity since It's one God in three persons.......
6:12 The Holy Ghost proceeds from the reciprocal love of the Father and the Son. Hence, He proceeds from both the Father and the Son. If you say - like the Eastern Heterodox Apostates - that God the Holy Ghost only proceeds from the Father (and Jesus proceeds from only the Father), then you get a strange bifurcation of God the Father into two false gods. The filioque is correct… and it was obviously needed, because were still explaining this complicated topic today.
I think the reason for the split is not about faith. This is politics. West and East consisted of different states and had different cultures and traditions. In the first period of Christianity, on the basis of common enthusiasm, people believed that they could stay together. But when the enthusiasm passed, it surfaced that the East does not want to be under the West, and the West intends to become the most important and dictate the rules. Moreover, if the Catholic Pope is the most important, then the political and economic influence of the West on the rest of the Christian world and countries / states will be comprehensive. For Eastern countries, this is not patriotic, don't you think? It's the same as being always occupied, or being someone's colony.
5:42 The three Persons of God always existed. But God the Son entered time and space; the Word became flesh. The Holy Ghost came down from Heaven to Earth, ten days after Ascension Thursday, when Jesus went on the clouds to Heaven with His resurrected body. Before Jesus came, people had an incomplete understanding of God. Our understanding of God was clarified over time by God via divine revelation via graces. The heresies of the false idea of the creation of Jesus and the Holy Ghost have been addressed by the popes. They are all three co-eternal co-equal and Triune and were never created.
The Islamic civilization borrowed the culture, aesthetics and architecture of the conquered territories. What is now known as Islamic architecture and aesthetics is a mixture of Iranian and Eastern Roman (Byzantine) aesthetics. Orthodox Christianity was also based on Eastern Roman aesthetics.
In the church feast days and how/when they were practiced varied greatly and was allowed to according to the faith. While I’m not familiar with the Pascha/Easter issue itself, it is indeed the celebration of Jesus’ Resurrection. It is the new Passover and the most important holiday of the year (at least for Orthodox)
PALESTAINE AREA AT THAT TIME , AND THE HELLENIST TIMES BEFORE , WERE PUPULATED ALOT BY GREEKS , AND HELLINAZED JUISH . SINCE ALEXANDER THE GREAT , GREEK WAS THE MOST COMMON LANGUAGE EAST FROM ROME UP TO INDIA AND EGYPT. THE 12 APOSTOLES AND SAINT PAUL WROTE IN GREEK THE EVANGELIA.
5:55 Per St. Thomas Aquinas, the body is the result of the soul’s effects on the dust of the Earth. A soul must be present to animate a body. God the Son always existed, but He didn’t always have a human body. He does now. God the Holy Spirit came upon Mary (the New Ark of the New Covenant) as the “Spirit of God” in the Old Testament writings did upon the literal, physical Ark of the Covenant.
You need to understand GOD IS A BODY , each part of the Body has different functions, there is Just 1 Creator: God Father , heis the only Creator, Jesus was there but he was not the creator , he is our Savior , is like writting with your right Hand, your other hand is there and it is also part of you but is not the one writting
God is outside space and time, since He is the ground of being. If you want to understand the Trinity, you should also incorporate Platonic philosophy into your ideas (specifically, Hypostases). By the way, Islam is built on a framework of Platonic philosophy in many ways as well.
West (Rome alone) those years didn't spoke greek but even properly Latin because of Frankish/German domination. All East ( the 4 patriarchates) spoke greek
Trinity 101 The eternal procession are just Grounding relations, they are merely origin insofar as they exist due to their relation, this doesn’t entail that they are ontologically different. For example, the flame that gives rise to another flame isn’t more of a flame than the latter, But it is its origin. In Trinitarian theology, that’s the only way to distinguish the Three persons, otherwise they are just ad hoc beings. The East says that giving the Son the “property” of originator of the Spirit is giving what makes the Father himself to the Son The West says that it isn’t the case because it’s still one action and not two actions, which entails that The Father is still the only originator. Either way, in the 1st Century we have notions that the Jews had a notion of Binitarianism (see Two Powers in Heaven by Alen F Segal, and The Jewish Christ by Daniel Boyarin) The Holy Spirit is mentioned in Matthew 28:19 and In John 14:16-17 as a person with the same status as Father and Son. The Early Christ believes worshipped Christ along with the Father and the spirit. So to imply that it is an innovation in the later centuries is a false claim.
Hello guys, id like to explain what the video messed up ... The English language is op bc it has intermediary words like: he, her, they, if, what, when, why, how, etc. Older languages don't has as much of those if any at all, so they smash prefixes and suffixes together like lego pieces. Also have you built a lego contraption and someone turned it upside down and thought it was something else? This is where the problem lies. In both the "high litergical" languages (Aramaic, Hebrew, and Koine Greek) and "low litergical" languages (Antonin Greek, Latin, and Coptic) don't have intermediate words. "Filoque" means "God mother" in Latin "Oqfilue" means "Mother of god" in Latin "Theotokos" means "Mother of god" in Greek "Tokotheos" means "God mother" in Greek Keep in mind the first part is the most important part, So thats why they argue. Im Reformed myself so i don't really care, but i still research.
Sorry but Filioque does not mean "God mother" in Latin It comes from the word Filios which means son and it is put in the proper grammatical form to say "and of the son" which is put in the genitive. This is not why they argue, leaders from both sides of the church understood both languages clearly.
@@Andypanda34 they most certainly argue about the nature of the Virgin Mary, specifically should we focus on when she was alive and taking care of Jesus vs when she went to heaven.
@@Andypanda34 the Immaculate Conception, whether she actually went to heaven, and "Maryology" is (one of the reasons) why they argue in doctrine. Focus wise they do about whats more important: her life on earth vs after she died.
What is the idea of the trinity? Christians believe that man is the only creature created in the image and likeness of God, that is, man is also a trinity. Just as the individual human personality consists of three hypostases (body, soul, spirit), so the divine personality consists of three hypostases (father, son, holy spirit). Animals have no spirit, only body and soul. The human body constantly gives birth to a soul and emits a spirit from itself. Also, the father-god constantly gives birth to the son-god (divine mind) and emits the holy spirit from himself. The Catholic understanding of the Trinity lies in the fact that they consider the source of the holy spirit not the hypostasis of the father, but the divine essence itself. It turns out that the father and son at the level of essence are one and the same, therefore both are the source of the holy spirit.
Of course, I could be wrong, but isn't it: Father is God Son - Jesus and other prophets, etc. Is the Holy Spirit some kind of soul/energy from which things and beings can come?
Hi. I see that no one else has answered your question, so let me give it a try. Father is God, yes, asi in the Creator of the whole universe. The Son would be Jesus only, (Jesus is the name he had when the Son incarnated, since he existed since the beginning of times) not the prophets (remember Christianity does not count Jesus as a prophet, but the incarnation of the Son). The Holy Spirit, as I understand it, is the aspect or part of God that can "Dwell" inside of us and inspire us to become closer to him or even Grant us certain abilities like prophesy or accomplishing miracles. According to the Nicene Creed, the Holy Spirit spoke through the prophets, the Scriptures were written under the guidance and inspiration of the Holy Spirit.
some early christians wanted holy thursday to stay on Nissan 14 the date of Passover in the Jewish calendar after the destruction of the temple and the expelling of the jews by the romans some christians wanted to be less jewish so they changed easter to the first sunday after the first full moon after the vernal equinox. passover and western easter are generally around the same time, but because the east doesnt use the gregorian calendar they drifting from passover
The whole thing is the pope is also the main reason the churches were divided. As orthodox Christians we do not want the pope because his ideologies deviate from the true meaning of religion..Very nice video thank you! 🙂
THE CREED (Nicaea 325 AD) 1. I believe in one God, the Father Almighty, Creator of heaven and earth, and of all things visible and invisible. 2. And in one Lord, Jesus Christ, the only begotten Son of God, begotten of the Father before all ages. Light of Light, true God of true God, begotten, not created, of one essence with the Father, through whom all things were made. 3. For us and for our salvation, He came down from heaven and was incarnated by the Holy Spirit and the Virgin Mary and became man. 4. He was crucified for us under Pontius Pilate, and He suffered and was buried. 5. On the third day He rose according to the Scriptures. 6. He ascended into heaven and is seated at the right hand of the Father. 7. He will come again in glory to judge the living and the dead. His kingdom will have no end. 8. And in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the Giver of Life, who proceeds from the Father, who together with the Father and the Son is worshiped and glorified, who spoke through the prophets. 9. One, holy, catholic, and apostolic Church. 10. I acknowledge one baptism for the forgiveness of sins. 11. I expect the resurrection of the dead. 12. And the life of the age to come. Amen
I think the video takes the Orthodox position that filioque was added, but its Catholic contention that the majority of the issue comes down to how the Bible is translated in Greek vs Latin.
Wrong Jesus said before abraham was"I AM" so Jesus was not a human which became a god He was present already with God, the Father along with the Holy Spirit He further Father glorify your Son, give me the glory which i had wit u even before this world came into existence
@@MuslimMindsUS the son always originates from the father. I think islamic minds cannot cross biological barriers to think of son and father relationship. The Father and son in trinity is the bond they have, the love they have. It's not biological son and father.
Also, I hate the way this guy in the video says several different terms, such as Nicaea, Pascha, Filioque, etc. Makes me cringe and makes me kinda think he doesn't know enough about what he's talking about
It is not Chatolic, all cristian if the Qeeun of Ethiopia she pregnant st. Solomon(King of Israel )and she come in Ethiopia, she bearth king 1st Minilik and he adult he go him father Israel he use to God give Mosse 10 rules and he use this 10rules before birth of Jesus if you Read Bible King of Solomon he live in the World befor birth of Jesus if you see ancient book Ethiopia in brithis Tourism or if you see musilim in Ethiopia they come Perophet Mohamed he theachs small group and they come and theaches in 7century And THE BEGINNING O F CRISHTIYAN ISRAEL (Read in the Bible )
The Holy Spirit and the the son Jesus were not ‘ created’ because like you said they are persons of God and God cannot be created or destroyed The Holy Spirit has been mentioned since the very beginning as God was creating the heaven and the earth His spirit hovered over the waters as he created day and night and light and darkness In the gospel of John it is said In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 He was with God in the beginning. 3 Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made. 4 In him was life, and that life was the light of all mankind. 5 The light shines in the darkness, and the darkness has not overcome it. This is referring to Jesus he was always there and was even mentioned in the Old Testament not only prophesied to be born into the world and save the world but as already existing I understand this is difficult to understand especially as a non believer but I had to put it here anyway
Jesus and The Holy Spirit are eternal. They are eternally begotten in the case of The Son and The Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father. there is no start or end point of any energy of God. This is the Orthodox viewpoint, unchanged from the beginning of The Church. The west’s change was not a mistranslation, but rather a difference in theology and was added to combat the arianism heresy
@@MuslimMindsUS it is eternal procession, and eternal begotten. Greek word from beggoten is monogenes, which means more like only related Son, but English translating tradition said beggoten, so they kinda continued that wording.
The Father is eternal. The Son is eternally begotten. The Holy Spirit eternally proceeds. All 3 persons are eternal(beyond time and space as boundaries). Nonetheless, the Son and the Spirit derive their essence FROM the Father as His expression of love. The divine essence is the Father's, but He grants it as an eternal gift of love to the Son and the Spirit, and so they share in His actual essence, thus they too are God. God is one, and when we speak of God, we speak of the divine essence. By default, we often think of 1 person when we do this, and unless otherwise specified, that 1 person is the Father, but, since they share in the essence, both the Son and Spirit can equally be spoken of as God...such is the Father's love. The model of the Trinity that the Church has held to historically is known as Monarchical Trinitarianism. We, as Man, may, through synergy with God and by His grace, partake in the divine nature too, but through His energies, without access to His essence. This process is known as Theosis, and the model referred to as the Essence vs Energies Distinction is rather essential to getting an intellectual grasp, such as it is, on both the Trinity AND what Theosis is. Filioque - The issue with the Filioque, aside from whether the creed ought be changed or not, is that the Orthodox view adding "and the Son", in regards to the Spirit's procession, affects the divine balance of the Monarchy of the Trinity, stating that the Spirit eternally proceeds, in essence, from the Son as well as the Father, now being the least of the 3, rather than both the Son and the Spirit sharing that essential status. Now, the Filioque was initially added in, ad hoc, as a counter move against a heresy, and was in reference to the Son being able to "send" the Spirit just as the Father may. This is an energetic action though, as opposed to an essential origination(again, see the Essence vs Energies Distinction). Due to this nuance, there was even eastern fathers who supported the Filioque early on, in that context of battling that heresy where it reared its head. The issue comes in with the possibility, and actuality, of people then understanding the Filioque in the "essential origination" sense, and particularly that, despite that danger, the Bishop of Rome assumed an as-yet-unseen degree of authority in order to attempt to mandate that change, unilaterally, across the entire Christian world.
@@MuslimMindsUSbecause english language is very dumb, in greek or latin(the original languages) is pronounced Nee-Keh-Ah. English mispronounce eveything because the algo saxons didn't learn the latin alphabet properely.
The Creed isn’t a contract. It’s a written statement of facts that are to be believed by all in the church. Truth is paramount, not democracy. Even if 95% of a group is wrong, they are still wrong, not matter how many of them there are. Rome had the pope, who knew the truth because God established the role of pope (Vicar of Jesus the Christ the King) with Peter, and his seat was always in Rome, and Peter’s direct successors were always in a place of primacy since the time of Christ. By the 4th Century, however, those generations were too far removed to remember that. The East started thinking they were on equal footing with Rome, especially after Constantine moved the capital of the Roman Empire to Constantinople. Rome retained the pope with church primacy while the political power was in the East.
Here's a good way to think of the trinity (or at least it's a good way to understand it for me) Imagine you're standing in front of a mirror, you cast a reflection but this time the reflection isn't just a reflection but it is another you, think of that as your image. since this "another" you is completely soverign and independent in body, mind and will but at the same time substantially united to you (since you are the source) the image of you (the reflection) is not you but an image of you that is from you and of you but not you. now whatever force that binds you to the image is the force that could either proceed from only you or from you and the image. The father is the source, the son is the image and the Holy Spirit is the force that binds them together. Since God is infinite and timeless, he would not have thoughts but he would have a thought, he would not speak words, but would speak a words that would encapsulate all of his word. Within Christianity the image is that word, he is that thought. This is why we call Jesus the Word of God. I hope that helped! Great video as always, if you guys wanna check out catholic content i write detailed write ups on Instagram @themalaysiancatholic God bless!
Neither Catholics nor Orthodox believe the other persons "came into being" they are eternally existing with the Father.
Hello Andrew!! But the term begotten means to come from something right? Unless i'm misunderstanding...
How can something be "eternally begotten" from the Father? Doesn't that rationally contradict itself?
No disrespect intended, the phrasing just seems completely contradictory to us...
Thanks for your comment!
-Hamza
@@MuslimMindsUS Well, when discussing the nature of omnipotence we do run into these questions. But the idea is that since it is literally God who is all-powerful or omnipotent he can do things which we find to be contradictory. I see the square circle argument a lot to criticize the contradictory nature of the trinity but it doesn’t apply because God is fully capable of creating a square circle because he is all-powerful. So for God, it would be possible for him to be eternally begotten of himself.
@@MuslimMindsUS in this case begotten means "sent" the Father sends Christ to earth, and from the Father procedes the holy spirit, but all 3 are Eternal, and equal. This is the orthadox view, while Catholicism has the Holy spirit procede from both Father and son, it's complicated, but both achieve the same theology in the end.
@@MuslimMindsUS understand his comment. He said, they did not come into being. They were with the father always. Read the creed. It says begotten not made, god from god, light from light, consubstantial with the father.
@@MuslimMindsUS The eternal begetting of the Son and the procession of the Holy Spirit are not to be understood as temporal events (as time and space weren't even created yet) but as causal events. So the Father is the reason behind the Son and Holy Spirit, not like an ancestor that existed at an earlier point in time.
The orthodox have the original version of the creed, no changes.
Hey Andrew! Just from this video, it did look like Orthodox were more staunch on preserving the original doctrines...
Thanks!
-Hamza
Bullshit. The church has the right to make appropriate changes that do not take away the original idea. The magisterium of the church decides, not you.
You guys are so respectful and composed and I admire that so much, a breath of fresh air, thank you from an Orthodox Christian 🙏🏼❤️
Appreciate it Hazel!! Be sure to subscribe to our channel, really helps us out!
-Hamza
@@MuslimMindsUS sure have! All the best 🙏🏻
2:39 Jesus was resurrected on Sunday. Jews at the time had been used to Shabbat from sundown Friday to sundown Saturday. Celebrating the Sabbath on Saturday was ended. The Lord’s Day became Sunday. The pope knew this, but many people were confused during the evangelization process. Some began teaching heresy. The council sought to clarify the truth for everyone.
The Great Schism had started a few decades before the coming of Muhammad.
But when the Rashidun and Umayyad Caliphates have started to conquer parts of Europe , such as the Iberian peninsula, Sicily and Cyprus, the Byzantines asked the Western (christian) kingdoms for help. The West told the Byzantines that unless they do not accept their reforms suggestions, they will not be helped. And so, the Byzantine Empire lost the modern-day lands of Syria, Liban, Israel, Palestine, Cyprus and Northern Africa. (This is - I think - the biggest reason for why the crusades, even though the crusades were of the catholics, existed in the first place.) And that is also a great observation of what non-believes Muhammad and his sucessors were referring to.
The Great Schism ended three centuries later, in 1054. It was a slow split-up. A painful split-up for us Catholic and Orthodox Christians.
Wow, was not aware of this history, thanks for letting us know!
-Hamza
7:24
The "East" didn't "use Greek translations".
The original text of the new testament is in Greek.
Those videos you react to are really not that good.
Oh well, they are the most popular ones 😅
3:33 The original Apostles’ Creed is correct and true, but it is light on details compared to the Nicene Creed. The Apostles’ Creed simply says, “I believe in the Holy Ghost.” The Nicene Creed inserted a few needed clarifying details that had since been revealed by God via Divine Grace. These clarifications (they weren’t dogmatic changes to the faith) were needed, especially in the East.
So actually I saw you got confused with Arianism which the belief of the Father creating the Son and the Holy Spirit which today is concidered a heresy Nicene Christianity which almost all branches are is that the Father, Son and Holy Spirit all three have always existed nobody created each other also Jesus is the Word of God that became Flesh and dwelled Among us (John 1)
They have “always” existed bc they’re outside of time, but the Father is the source of the other two. It’s kind of hard to explain/visualize lol. Peep the Nicene creed
From what I understand you are muslim. Trinitarian theology is not easy to explain so I'll try from the Orthodox perspective. God is one, incomprehensible and infinite. He is the first and last, He who exists creator and sustainer of all. God is unknown to humanity. All we know is by divine revelations in the holy scripts. According to these revelations (the Christian bible, this means the old testament or hebrew bible and the new testament), God exists in three persons. They all just exists within the one, they are equal and coexists in eternity. None of the persons came into being. I am not going into the specifics, it will take too long but i will surmise it like this. The son is the logos, the word of God. Just like the word of Allah was put in a book, the Quran, so the word of God was put in the human Jesus so to speak. The holy spirit, in Greek holy Pneuma, is the equivalent of the breath or wind of Allah. The holy spirit is the creative power of God. There are many more names of each of the persons ofc, for example you say in the video the Son of God but this person's divinity derives from the term Son of Man which appears in the prophecies of Daniel and Jesus identifies as, in the Gospels. In any case, initially the Christians had agreed in the Nicean creed that the holy spirit proceeds only from the father. After some centuries the Pope decides to alter the creed by adding "and the son". There were 2 issues here. 1st one the changing of the theology, the second was a question of authority, how could the Pope change something in the creed, since up to that point he was just another patriarch and not above the other 4 patriarchs (Constantinople, Alexandria, Jerusalem and Antioch). You have to understand that the ecumenical counsels took place mostly to address heresies, so for example the 2nd counsel, the one of Constantinople, did not change the creed, but added to it and the changes are accepted by both of what is now the Orthodox and Catholic church.
The conclusion you came to about the trinity are pretty close to how Arian Christians understood the whole thing. Eastern and Western churches don't believe that the Son or the Holy Spirit were created. At least according to what I know.
Hey v Eden, a few people have told us the same thing regarding Arian Christians. Very interesting information..
Please be sure to subscribe, lots more videos coming out soon :)
Appreciate your comment!
-Hamza
That was a wonderful video. Keep up the good work you guys :)
@@MuslimMindsUS The orthodox trinitarian view is that God the son is 'eternally begotten, not made' and the holy spirit is eternal with the father. They are all co equal, co eternal, and make 1 God, but, confusingly, they are not the same. The father, son, and spirit are distinct with distinct roles. Also jesus as God the son is 100 percent God and 100 percent man with his natures remaining distinct but he is only 1 person. Trinitarianism is confusing, that is why they call it a 'mystery'. There were wars fought over making sense of this.
So, to clear things up, Nicene creed of 325 included all three persons, it said:
"I believe in one God, Father Almighty, Creator of heaven and earth, and of all things visible and invisible.
And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the only-begotten Son of God, begotten of the Father before all ages; Light of Light, true God of true God, begotten, not created, of one essence with the Father through Whom all things were made. Who for us men and for our salvation came down from heaven and was incarnate of the Holy Spirit and the Virgin Mary and became man. He was crucified for us under Pontius Pilate, and suffered and was buried; And He rose on the third day, according to the Scriptures. He ascended into heaven and is seated at the right hand of the Father; And He will come again with glory to judge the living and dead. His kingdom shall have no end.
And in the Holy Spirit"
But, at Constantinople in 381, when fighting against heresy of Macedonianism, it was added:
"(And in the Holy Spirit) the Lord, the Creator of life, Who proceeds from the Father, Who together with the Father and the Son is worshipped and glorified, Who spoke through the prophets.
In one, holy, catholic, and apostolic Church.
I confess one baptism for the forgiveness of sins.
I look for the resurrection of the dead, and the life of the age to come"
Latins added in 589 phrase 'and the Son'. And pope recited it for first time in 1014.
Regarding Quatrodeciman issue, churches of Asia minor who are more tied to St John the Apostle celebrated Easter when Hebrews celebrate Passover, they started on Friday and it continued until Sunday. Other churches celebrated it on Sunday only and with different dating than Jews. It is important to note that there was no schism at start, St Polycarp, who was bishop of Smyrna and was Quatrodeciman, and St Anicetus who was bishop of Rome celebrated liturgy together when they tried to resolve the issue. Council of Nicea decreed that more common custom has to be followed universaly, for the sake of unity in celebrating Easter.
Hello, thanks for the clarifications!!
-Hamza
0:17 All three persons of God are co-equal and co-eternal. God the Son and God the Holy Ghost are not “creatures” as the angels and humans are. You two are asking AMAZING questions btw. Y’all have a very good grasp on Christian belief, but your thought process is corrupted by Protestants who chime in falsehoods. God bless you on you journey to God, understanding Him as the Triune God that He is. ♥️
Thank you ochem123 for hearing us out and not vilifying us for our questions!
-Rohaib
If you want to start a fight, talk about the trinity.
From a traditional chrisitian theology God has always existed, the trinity has always existed, the members of the trinity have always existed, they are distinct but unified, individuals but one, equal but different. It's complicated and I think you've thought more about it than most christians.
There have always been christian groups who don't believe in the trinity and are normally labelled heretics. The Arians said Christ was created by the Father, the council of Nicea in this video was held to decide whether they were right. Jehovah's Witnesses believe something similar. The Unitarian church doesn't believe in the trinity. Mormons/Latter day Saints believe something else again.
Don't know if this makes the arguments clearer. ua-cam.com/video/Yp2nyVsd6Ro/v-deo.html
Hey Doug, seems to be many differing views for sure… Definitely a lot we need to learn 😅
-Hamza
It's easier to understand I find buy using the metaphor of a diamond. It has facets.
We can say Aspect here. This may be a bit mystical but Jesus is more the perspective of human consciousness understanding from its own point of view. That is why the kingdom is within thee. God is totality of existence despite the perspective of human consciousness. That kind of vision or beatitude has a distinct revelation of non-human consciousness. The holy spirit is the perspective of a kind of two-headed beatitude. It is receiving the wisdom and grace without losing self-awareness or self-identity - as in - you maintain(for the most part) your continuous awareness while also being aware of the great mystery that is God.
An “ecumenical council”, historically is a council of the “all bishops of the church” as the church covered a large geographic area it became acceptable to send the decisions for bishops unable to attend to consent to, thus directly or indirectly western bishops agreed to the first council of Constantinople
From what I’ve heard the fillioque was a result of the vestiges of Arianism which was most pervasive in the west of the empire even well after Nicaea 1 anathematized Arius and his followers. Ironically the same reason Constantinople 1 was held
The original creed did not include the section about the procession of the persons of the trinity at all. The section modified with the fillioque was entirely original to Constantinople 1.
Why are so many words pronounced incorrectly in the video you showed? clearly not a very academic video. Also as so many others have mentioned begotten does not mean they have not always existed. C.S Lewis has good examples that can begin to explain this in a way you might understand in the book Mere Christianity.
Hey Coby, we noticed the mispronunciations as well, the video itself seemed pretty academic though, their whole channel is stuff like this.
Okay, we can look into it, thanks for the info!
-Hamza
yes I was cringing so much at the pronunciations.
Bro-tip: The words we use in english in our modern day and understanding are heavily contorted compared to their usage and meaning 'back in the day'. Like the word terrible. We use it now for a really potent form of 'bad'. But it's classically used to be something that creates a subservient form of terror, kind of like the wrath of a father when you're in trouble, or the roar of a massive storm or the shaking of a hungry earthquake. So at that juncture it would be best to check the original greek words from the Septuagint, Assyrian, or Hebrew words (if you can find it). Then using the shared(ish) alphabets, transliterate them into Arabic.
Terrible originally meant "to fill with fear", but in modern times it has come to mean "really bad". I'm not sure where you're getting "subservient form of terror, kind of like the wrath of a father when you're in trouble, or the roar of a massive storm or the shaking of a hungry earthquake". A good example of terrible in its early sense is in the epithet for Ivan the Terrible, he wasn't called that because he was an incompetent ruler but because he instilled fear. To read and understand the bible in English doesn't require you to learn multiple languages and transliterate to one but to learn the words in their proper context.
I'm Catholic, I find the excommunications on each sides really funny and childish
To add something for no reason is childish catholic heresy
The Son and Holy Spirit didn't come "later on". Because that implies time and space, but the begetting of the Son and the breathing out of the Spirit are when space and time didn't exist. I understand it's hard to conceive of the Father begetting the Son because it seems to imply "one happened after another", but it's more proper to speaking of the Father always eternally having begotten the Son, and the Father and Son always eternally have breathing out the Spirit.
THE CATHOLICS PUT HOLY SPIRIT UNDER THE SON , WHERE ORTHODOX BELEAVE THE HOLY SPIRIT COMES OUT ONLY FROM FATHER AND IS EQUAL WITH SON. HOPE I HELPED.
Interesting, so if they are under the father, doesn’t that mean they cannot be co-equal?
-Hamza
FOR ORTHODOX THE RELATION IS A TRIANGLE . TOP IS THE FATHER AND THE BASE IS FORMED FROM SON AND HOLY SPIRIT.
FOR CATHOLICS IS A STRAIGHT LINE.
No Catholics didn't put The holy Spirit under the son.... they're equal
Since The Son Also Proceed from the Father and the Holy Spirit.....
@@MuslimMindsUSthe way orthodox believe About the Trinity is imbalance.....is not Equal..... it's in a sense of Seperation....you cannot Seperate the Holy Trinity since It's one God in three persons.......
6:12 The Holy Ghost proceeds from the reciprocal love of the Father and the Son. Hence, He proceeds from both the Father and the Son. If you say - like the Eastern Heterodox Apostates - that God the Holy Ghost only proceeds from the Father (and Jesus proceeds from only the Father), then you get a strange bifurcation of God the Father into two false gods. The filioque is correct… and it was obviously needed, because were still explaining this complicated topic today.
I think the reason for the split is not about faith. This is politics. West and East consisted of different states and had different cultures and traditions. In the first period of Christianity, on the basis of common enthusiasm, people believed that they could stay together. But when the enthusiasm passed, it surfaced that the East does not want to be under the West, and the West intends to become the most important and dictate the rules. Moreover, if the Catholic Pope is the most important, then the political and economic influence of the West on the rest of the Christian world and countries / states will be comprehensive. For Eastern countries, this is not patriotic, don't you think? It's the same as being always occupied, or being someone's colony.
5:42 The three Persons of God always existed. But God the Son entered time and space; the Word became flesh. The Holy Ghost came down from Heaven to Earth, ten days after Ascension Thursday, when Jesus went on the clouds to Heaven with His resurrected body. Before Jesus came, people had an incomplete understanding of God. Our understanding of God was clarified over time by God via divine revelation via graces. The heresies of the false idea of the creation of Jesus and the Holy Ghost have been addressed by the popes. They are all three co-eternal co-equal and Triune and were never created.
Even the style of the Orthodox Church is very similar in Islam
The Islamic civilization borrowed the culture, aesthetics and architecture of the conquered territories. What is now known as Islamic architecture and aesthetics is a mixture of Iranian and Eastern Roman (Byzantine) aesthetics. Orthodox Christianity was also based on Eastern Roman aesthetics.
In the church feast days and how/when they were practiced varied greatly and was allowed to according to the faith. While I’m not familiar with the Pascha/Easter issue itself, it is indeed the celebration of Jesus’ Resurrection. It is the new Passover and the most important holiday of the year (at least for Orthodox)
GREEK AND GREECE THE ALHPA AND OMEGA. EVERY EVANGELION WAS WRITTEN IN GREEK . LIKE ISLAMIC BOOKS WERE WRITTEN IN ARABIC.
Nice! But wasn’t Jesus and the disciples speaking Aramaic, not Greek?
PALESTAINE AREA AT THAT TIME , AND THE HELLENIST TIMES BEFORE , WERE PUPULATED ALOT BY GREEKS , AND HELLINAZED JUISH . SINCE ALEXANDER THE GREAT , GREEK WAS THE MOST COMMON LANGUAGE EAST FROM ROME UP TO INDIA AND EGYPT. THE 12 APOSTOLES AND SAINT PAUL WROTE IN GREEK THE EVANGELIA.
5:55 Per St. Thomas Aquinas, the body is the result of the soul’s effects on the dust of the Earth. A soul must be present to animate a body. God the Son always existed, but He didn’t always have a human body. He does now. God the Holy Spirit came upon Mary (the New Ark of the New Covenant) as the “Spirit of God” in the Old Testament writings did upon the literal, physical Ark of the Covenant.
You need to understand GOD IS A BODY , each part of the Body has different functions, there is Just 1 Creator: God Father , heis the only Creator, Jesus was there but he was not the creator , he is our Savior , is like writting with your right Hand, your other hand is there and it is also part of you but is not the one writting
God is outside space and time, since He is the ground of being.
If you want to understand the Trinity, you should also incorporate Platonic philosophy into your ideas (specifically, Hypostases).
By the way, Islam is built on a framework of Platonic philosophy in many ways as well.
West (Rome alone) those years didn't spoke greek but even properly Latin because of Frankish/German domination. All East ( the 4 patriarchates) spoke greek
Trinity 101
The eternal procession are just Grounding relations, they are merely origin insofar as they exist due to their relation, this doesn’t entail that they are ontologically different.
For example, the flame that gives rise to another flame isn’t more of a flame than the latter, But it is its origin.
In Trinitarian theology, that’s the only way to distinguish the Three persons, otherwise they are just ad hoc beings.
The East says that giving the Son the “property” of originator of the Spirit is giving what makes the Father himself to the Son
The West says that it isn’t the case because it’s still one action and not two actions, which entails that The Father is still the only originator.
Either way, in the 1st Century we have notions that the Jews had a notion of Binitarianism (see Two Powers in Heaven by Alen F Segal, and The Jewish Christ by Daniel Boyarin)
The Holy Spirit is mentioned in Matthew 28:19 and In John 14:16-17 as a person with the same status as Father and Son.
The Early Christ believes worshipped Christ along with the Father and the spirit. So to imply that it is an innovation in the later centuries is a false claim.
Hello guys, id like to explain what the video messed up ...
The English language is op bc it has intermediary words like:
he, her, they, if, what, when, why, how, etc.
Older languages don't has as much of those if any at all, so they smash prefixes and suffixes together like lego pieces. Also have you built a lego contraption and someone turned it upside down and thought it was something else? This is where the problem lies.
In both the "high litergical" languages (Aramaic, Hebrew, and Koine Greek) and "low litergical" languages (Antonin Greek, Latin, and Coptic) don't have intermediate words.
"Filoque" means "God mother" in Latin
"Oqfilue" means "Mother of god" in Latin
"Theotokos" means "Mother of god" in Greek
"Tokotheos" means "God mother" in Greek
Keep in mind the first part is the most important part,
So thats why they argue.
Im Reformed myself so i don't really care, but i still research.
Thanks for the info King Karna!
-Rohaib
Sorry but Filioque does not mean "God mother" in Latin
It comes from the word Filios which means son and it is put in the proper grammatical form to say "and of the son" which is put in the genitive. This is not why they argue, leaders from both sides of the church understood both languages clearly.
@@Andypanda34 they most certainly argue about the nature of the Virgin Mary, specifically should we focus on when she was alive and taking care of Jesus vs when she went to heaven.
@@kingkarna7168 no we really don't argue about Mary, only that she was assumed into heaven.
@@Andypanda34 the Immaculate Conception, whether she actually went to heaven, and "Maryology" is (one of the reasons) why they argue in doctrine.
Focus wise they do about whats more important: her life on earth vs after she died.
What is the idea of the trinity? Christians believe that man is the only creature created in the image and likeness of God, that is, man is also a trinity. Just as the individual human personality consists of three hypostases (body, soul, spirit), so the divine personality consists of three hypostases (father, son, holy spirit). Animals have no spirit, only body and soul. The human body constantly gives birth to a soul and emits a spirit from itself. Also, the father-god constantly gives birth to the son-god (divine mind) and emits the holy spirit from himself. The Catholic understanding of the Trinity lies in the fact that they consider the source of the holy spirit not the hypostasis of the father, but the divine essence itself. It turns out that the father and son at the level of essence are one and the same, therefore both are the source of the holy spirit.
Of course, I could be wrong, but isn't it:
Father is God
Son - Jesus and other prophets, etc.
Is the Holy Spirit some kind of soul/energy from which things and beings can come?
Hi. I see that no one else has answered your question, so let me give it a try. Father is God, yes, asi in the Creator of the whole universe. The Son would be Jesus only, (Jesus is the name he had when the Son incarnated, since he existed since the beginning of times) not the prophets (remember Christianity does not count Jesus as a prophet, but the incarnation of the Son). The Holy Spirit, as I understand it, is the aspect or part of God that can "Dwell" inside of us and inspire us to become closer to him or even Grant us certain abilities like prophesy or accomplishing miracles. According to the Nicene Creed, the Holy Spirit spoke through the prophets, the Scriptures were written under the guidance and inspiration of the Holy Spirit.
Did you finally listen to the Trinity explanation you said you might react to? I'll have a few below
How To Understand the Trinity - ua-cam.com/video/IqjFe3AoZYw/v-deo.html
What Is the Trinity? - ua-cam.com/video/ToOHfdixzok/v-deo.html
Hey Lerianv, haven’t watched those yet but will try and check them out soon.
Appreciate the recommendations!
-Hamza
some early christians wanted holy thursday to stay on Nissan 14 the date of Passover in the Jewish calendar after the destruction of the temple and the expelling of the jews by the romans some christians wanted to be less jewish so they changed easter to the first sunday after the first full moon after the vernal equinox. passover and western easter are generally around the same time, but because the east doesnt use the gregorian calendar they drifting from passover
This is not a translation error.
The Trinity was not developed. It was like that before the start. If that makes sense which shouldn't.
The whole thing is the pope is also the main reason the churches were divided. As orthodox Christians we do not want the pope because his ideologies deviate from the true meaning of religion..Very nice video thank you! 🙂
THE CREED (Nicaea 325 AD)
1. I believe in one God, the Father Almighty, Creator of heaven and earth, and of all things visible and invisible.
2. And in one Lord, Jesus Christ, the only begotten Son of God, begotten of the Father before all ages. Light of Light, true God of true God, begotten, not created, of one essence with the Father, through whom all things were made.
3. For us and for our salvation, He came down from heaven and was incarnated by the Holy Spirit and the Virgin Mary and became man.
4. He was crucified for us under Pontius Pilate, and He suffered and was buried.
5. On the third day He rose according to the Scriptures.
6. He ascended into heaven and is seated at the right hand of the Father.
7. He will come again in glory to judge the living and the dead. His kingdom will have no end.
8. And in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the Giver of Life, who proceeds from the Father, who together with the Father and the Son is worshiped and glorified, who spoke through the prophets.
9. One, holy, catholic, and apostolic Church.
10. I acknowledge one baptism for the forgiveness of sins.
11. I expect the resurrection of the dead.
12. And the life of the age to come.
Amen
Pronunciation problems - Nicaea - Ni-see-ah, not Nikeea - Pascha - Pahs-kah - not Pa-sh-ka
In the begining let US make people..... US IT MEANS FAHTER ,SON,HOLLYSPIRIT FROM THE BEGINNINF ARE THE HOLLY SPIRIT AND THE SON WIRH THE FATHER
You can’t apply time to God, time is part of creation. God has authority over His creation, not the other way around.
I think the video takes the Orthodox position that filioque was added, but its Catholic contention that the majority of the issue comes down to how the Bible is translated in Greek vs Latin.
Wrong
Jesus said before abraham was"I AM" so Jesus was not a human which became a god
He was present already with God, the Father along with the Holy Spirit
He further Father glorify your Son, give me the glory which i had wit u even before this world came into existence
Not talking about Jesus as a human but the concept of God the son originated from the father according to trinitarian doctrine
@@MuslimMindsUS of course the Son is of same essence, substance, and of nature
@@thomasedison-yn3ql but a different person to be clear
@@Andypanda34 Jesus is only One Person but with 2 distinct nature
Fully God and fully Man
@@MuslimMindsUS the son always originates from the father. I think islamic minds cannot cross biological barriers to think of son and father relationship. The Father and son in trinity is the bond they have, the love they have. It's not biological son and father.
Its religion. If it doesn't make sense its because its not suppose too.
Also, I hate the way this guy in the video says several different terms, such as Nicaea, Pascha, Filioque, etc. Makes me cringe and makes me kinda think he doesn't know enough about what he's talking about
It is not Chatolic, all cristian if the Qeeun of Ethiopia she pregnant st. Solomon(King of Israel )and she come in Ethiopia, she bearth king 1st Minilik and he adult he go him father Israel he use to God give Mosse 10 rules and he use this 10rules before birth of Jesus if you Read Bible King of Solomon he live in the World befor birth of Jesus if you see ancient book Ethiopia in brithis Tourism or if you see musilim in Ethiopia they come Perophet Mohamed he theachs small group and they come and theaches in 7century And THE BEGINNING O F CRISHTIYAN ISRAEL (Read in the Bible )
How Jewish would the church be passover Easter s the fullness
In John 1 the father, son and spirt have existed since creation.
Before creation. All 3 created everything.
The Holy Spirit and the the son Jesus were not ‘ created’ because like you said they are persons of God and God cannot be created or destroyed
The Holy Spirit has been mentioned since the very beginning as God was creating the heaven and the earth
His spirit hovered over the waters as he created day and night and light and darkness
In the gospel of John it is said
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2
He was with God in the beginning. 3 Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made. 4
In him was life, and that life was the light of all mankind. 5 The light shines in the darkness, and the darkness has not overcome it.
This is referring to Jesus he was always there and was even mentioned in the Old Testament not only prophesied to be born into the world and save the world but as already existing
I understand this is difficult to understand especially as a non believer but I had to put it here anyway
Lol binubura niyo ba mga comments ko
Jesus and The Holy Spirit are eternal. They are eternally begotten in the case of The Son and The Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father. there is no start or end point of any energy of God. This is the Orthodox viewpoint, unchanged from the beginning of The Church. The west’s change was not a mistranslation, but rather a difference in theology and was added to combat the arianism heresy
If the Holy Spirit proceeds from the father does not that indicate it must have had a point of where the proceeding occurred?
-Rohaib
@@MuslimMindsUS it is eternal procession, and eternal begotten. Greek word from beggoten is monogenes, which means more like only related Son, but English translating tradition said beggoten, so they kinda continued that wording.
@@MuslimMindsUS So when we say He proceeds from Father, it is more that Holy Spirit is Father's spirit and gets essence from Him before all ages.
@@MuslimMindsUS I think the view is that the proceeding is as old as God, so eternal.
@@MuslimMindsUS No, The Holy Spirit eternally proceeds from The Father.
The Father is eternal. The Son is eternally begotten. The Holy Spirit eternally proceeds. All 3 persons are eternal(beyond time and space as boundaries). Nonetheless, the Son and the Spirit derive their essence FROM the Father as His expression of love. The divine essence is the Father's, but He grants it as an eternal gift of love to the Son and the Spirit, and so they share in His actual essence, thus they too are God. God is one, and when we speak of God, we speak of the divine essence. By default, we often think of 1 person when we do this, and unless otherwise specified, that 1 person is the Father, but, since they share in the essence, both the Son and Spirit can equally be spoken of as God...such is the Father's love.
The model of the Trinity that the Church has held to historically is known as Monarchical Trinitarianism.
We, as Man, may, through synergy with God and by His grace, partake in the divine nature too, but through His energies, without access to His essence. This process is known as Theosis, and the model referred to as the Essence vs Energies Distinction is rather essential to getting an intellectual grasp, such as it is, on both the Trinity AND what Theosis is.
Filioque -
The issue with the Filioque, aside from whether the creed ought be changed or not, is that the Orthodox view adding "and the Son", in regards to the Spirit's procession, affects the divine balance of the Monarchy of the Trinity, stating that the Spirit eternally proceeds, in essence, from the Son as well as the Father, now being the least of the 3, rather than both the Son and the Spirit sharing that essential status.
Now, the Filioque was initially added in, ad hoc, as a counter move against a heresy, and was in reference to the Son being able to "send" the Spirit just as the Father may. This is an energetic action though, as opposed to an essential origination(again, see the Essence vs Energies Distinction). Due to this nuance, there was even eastern fathers who supported the Filioque early on, in that context of battling that heresy where it reared its head. The issue comes in with the possibility, and actuality, of people then understanding the Filioque in the "essential origination" sense, and particularly that, despite that danger, the Bishop of Rome assumed an as-yet-unseen degree of authority in order to attempt to mandate that change, unilaterally, across the entire Christian world.
Think of god be
Being eternal the son is
His thoughts His thoughts are de
Dependent on the father it's really about papal overreach
the n- IKEA creed lmao
Yeah idk why he was saying it like that lol
-Rohaib
@@MuslimMindsUSbecause english language is very dumb, in greek or latin(the original languages) is pronounced Nee-Keh-Ah. English mispronounce eveything because the algo saxons didn't learn the latin alphabet properely.
The Creed isn’t a contract. It’s a written statement of facts that are to be believed by all in the church. Truth is paramount, not democracy. Even if 95% of a group is wrong, they are still wrong, not matter how many of them there are. Rome had the pope, who knew the truth because God established the role of pope (Vicar of Jesus the Christ the King) with Peter, and his seat was always in Rome, and Peter’s direct successors were always in a place of primacy since the time of Christ. By the 4th Century, however, those generations were too far removed to remember that. The East started thinking they were on equal footing with Rome, especially after Constantine moved the capital of the Roman Empire to Constantinople. Rome retained the pope with church primacy while the political power was in the East.
Here's a good way to think of the trinity (or at least it's a good way to understand it for me)
Imagine you're standing in front of a mirror, you cast a reflection but this time the reflection isn't just a reflection but it is another you, think of that as your image. since this "another" you is completely soverign and independent in body, mind and will but at the same time substantially united to you (since you are the source) the image of you (the reflection) is not you but an image of you that is from you and of you but not you. now whatever force that binds you to the image is the force that could either proceed from only you or from you and the image.
The father is the source, the son is the image and the Holy Spirit is the force that binds them together. Since God is infinite and timeless, he would not have thoughts but he would have a thought, he would not speak words, but would speak a words that would encapsulate all of his word. Within Christianity the image is that word, he is that thought. This is why we call Jesus the Word of God. I hope that helped! Great video as always, if you guys wanna check out catholic content i write detailed write ups on Instagram @themalaysiancatholic God bless!