Timestamps: ⏰❗️ 0:17 Introduction 1:07 The EO Accusations 1:42 Addressing “quotemining” 4:28 Terminology Change 5:27 So called reliance on quotes rather than metaphysical articulation 8:29 Aristotelian Reliance 11:02 No Concilliar Decision on everything 18:12 Quick Summary of the three councils 19:23 EO affirm Chalcedon through C2 22:20 OO supposedly have no apologetics contra-islam 26:00 Product or Subject? 37:40 Agreed Statements? 59:04 Eutyches and Two natures 1:08:26 Nestorianism and Chalcedon 1:11:15 Epinoia + En Theoria + Triadology 1:31:42 Maximus’ Challenge 1:33:50 Can Chalcedonians affirm “from two?” 1:40:56 Are “wholes” in parts? 1:43:38 OOs affirm subject change? 1:46:35 “EOs maintain one hypostasis with ek or en” 1:56:18 Tertium Quid? 2:03:53 Maximus and the Particularity of the Word and Flesh 2:09:25 Hylomorphism analogy? 2:16:00 Monophysites? Tawhid = Tewahedo 💥 2:26:55 One nature, one subject. Did anything enter the divine hypostasis? 2:31:08 Personal Names prove Persons 2:34:05 Anathematizing Theodore 2:39:51 C2 Prevents Nestorianism? 2:51:35 Aseity? 3:16:44 Hypostasis = Person/Prosopon 3:23:28 OO Working Definitions 3:30:56 Peshitta Masoretic? 3:32:23 Miscellaneous Definitions 3:33:15 Conclusion + QA 👇👇👇 3:37:51 Thoughts on Dialogues? 3:39:28 Too Complex? 3:43:00 Early dyophysite characters? 3:43:35 OO and ADS? 3:45:51 Apollonarian Forgeries? 3:47:23 Classical Theology? 3:47:50 Elaboration on Logical Priority of Essence 3:49:55 Post-Schism Chalcedonian Councils 3:52:26 Discerning True Church 3:54:38 Thoughts on Mar Mari Emmanuel? 3:56:30 View of Purgatory 3:58:15 Final Words
I am still rewatching this. It's full of knowledge that guides us on where to look. I feel like am back to school😂so thank you so much brother agen and ikan. I will use this video as reference for many years to come. God bless you both and the true and only orthodox church🙏❤
And on additional note once you truly understand the miaphysite christology you will realize there is no other way of understanding christology better or more clearly than that. Our christology can stand tall in every criticism because of how detailed it is and it shows how much care the church fathers have put to it. I pray we all have there wisdom and strength of faith🙏
To be honest with you guys, I don't think I can fully understand the hypostasis and prosopon thing in a hundred years, but I know for sure that my Tewahedo church is holy.
I'm on the EO side. I have a few questions but first I want to say that I can appreciate that you guys have done a good job defending your religion and responding to most of the points made in the original video. It's unfortunate that the culture of the young online apologists on our side is so ready to take things personally. I hope everyone realizes at some point that according to the Scriptures and Tradition, it's WORSE to be correct and approach God with an impure heart and impatience towards others than it is to simply be cold. Here are my questions: Could you give a brief description of your version of theosis? Also, if it can't be said that two Nature's persist out of the Hypostatic Union, aren't you forced to deny that the assumed human nature and the eternal Divine nature do not persist after It as well? If you confess they persist, isn't it just superstitious and petty word games to avoid using the number 2 when you're counting and distinguishing by affirming the persistence of the two Nature's after the Hypostatic Union?
Starting at 2:01:00, it seems to me like you reproduce in substance the Chalcedonian position. If the natures (and hypostases, according to your metaphysical system) don't collapse into one and retain their particularity and quality, you're enumerating two natures even if predicating them onto a single hypostasis. Or are you saying the substantial, concrete natures are metaphysically abolished and only the superficial appearances are retained?
@@Jy3pr6so they didn't reproduce in substance the Chalcedonian position. If you paid enough attention. From two opposites (hypostases) result one composite hypostasis. Composed of flesh/soul and Logos. Thus the whole is enumerated, retaining all set of natural qualities in the system of composition, for the flesh didn't become Logos or vice versa, but the Logos and flesh are enumerated as One, the Incarnafe Logos in the flesh. Or the Logos together with the flesh by composition.
@@Miaphysite3 Hence the two horns of my dilemma, the second of which you haven't responded to. I'm not saying that snarkilly. I'd like to know your answer
In regards to the 16:50 mark, even Maximus the Confessor (and Aquinas) affirm that hypostatic properties are manifest even in the particularities of the bodily elements. For instance, Maximus states that a “slanted nose” is an individuating physical property. In this sense, even Christ Humanity is an “individual” but not as constituting His individuation. For from all Eternity, He is the Logos of the Father and this constitutes his Hypostasis. Christ is only known rightly as inseparable from his Eternal Generation. For that quantitative extension of His Body has no existence seperable from the Logos. I can mentally conceptualized all the human properties of nature in Christ but I cannot see Christ (Divinity anointing humanity) apart from His Eternal Suppositum. “YH has become my YH-Shua.” Even Yeshua cannot be apprehended apart from his formal identity as YHWH. “We once regarded Christ according to the flesh but we do so no longer.” (Imagining him by individuating properties and reducing him to a mere man) I know you guys have some agreement on this. Just not sure where we differ yet. I will keep watching.
I appreciate this. Will help me understand more about what you guys believe. In regards to your understanding of the EED at the 15 minute mark, it must be noted that Neo Palamites affirm 2 res while, what I consider to be faithful orthodoxy, Palamism as such does not confirm two res but one. This, my series on the EED proves from the writings of the Fathers as you also demonstrate.
May the God of St. Cyril, St. Discord, and St. Severus bless each of you. You have no idea how much I am motivated to understand and defend my Orthodox church.
God bless. May the Lord protect His One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Orthodox Church. May the heresy of Chalcedon which attempted to dissolve Christ, our One Lord, be trampled underfoot speedily. 1 John 4:3 (DRA) "And every spirit that dissolveth Jesus, is not of God: and this is Antichrist, of whom you have heard that he cometh, and he is now already in the world."
Do you know that the original language of the epistle you quoted is Greek and not English? The Greek word used there has nothing to do with whatever it is you are implying here. Furthermore, one could argue that it is the monophysites who heretically dissolve two natures into one.
@@MinaDKSBMSB when you dissolve sugar in tea you no longer have two things, don't you? So who's dissolving what here? I think the monophysites clearly don't understand that Jesus Christ's Incarnation means that He is consubstantial with both God the Father and us, humans, i.e. He has 2 natures. Not that hard to understand, yet the pride of the monophysite heretics won't allow them to see the light of Truth.
Set up a debate with Jay dyer I know you already talked to him for 9 minutes but im talking a proper 3 hour debate with neutral moderators something well organised. Also i was curious how old are you ?
Doesn't make any deferent how old is he. He is the decendant of Saint Athanasius , Saint Cyril , and Saint Dioscoros. Dyer will never dare to debate him.Blessed be our mother of the martyrs the Holy Coptic Orthodox church.
Don't tell me to set up the debate with the guy who said "I dont have to talk to you". Go over to Dyer and go tell him to set something up look what hes gonna say.
Why are you telling Agen to set up a debate? He’d love to debate Dyer formally, Jay Dyer is the one that blocked him and said he doesn’t want to have a discussion with him. Go ask Jay to debate Agen
@@OrthodoxTitan I remember on the Sam episodes one of them said he was a young 19 year old I think. It could've been IKan.....? I was in awe of the young age and such knowledge and eloquence in their defence of the faith. Reminiscent of the young St Athanasius the Apostolic. God bless them all 🙏
Came to this video genuinely trying to choose between EO and OO. I left with the confirmation I needed. Thank you so much for this video. It showed me EO is the true church and the way to go
Another classic OO fail😂. Got halfway though and gave up on how bad the quote mining is and the lack of knowledge on basic metaphysics. You were right, you don’t understand the metaphysics
We are waiting the video where you will explain the errors. Seriously. I am EO but but I have studied the issue a lot and OO seems to be correct. Why does not not EO theologians answer to this videos seriously?
@@ApostolicOrthodoxy you just made to many mistakes and then brush them off after watching this I see why jay kicked you and the point of mode yes it can mean other things but he was talking about it in a contexts so for you to just bring up mode and all it’s definitions shows me that you want to just argue but you know what you could go set up a moderator debate jay does those and prove you point so y’all both and flush out the arguments
@EliteBaby-bh7zq Agreed. Jay called him on juggling what was accepted at the 5th council then said it doesn’t matter and put that on Jay while granting history lol.
![Lp. Сердце Вселенной #60 РОЖДЕНИЕ ЛОЛОЛОШКИ [Финал] • Майнкрафт](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/YoR0pAV9FVQ/mqdefault.jpg)
Timestamps: ⏰❗️
0:17 Introduction
1:07 The EO Accusations
1:42 Addressing “quotemining”
4:28 Terminology Change
5:27 So called reliance on quotes rather than metaphysical articulation
8:29 Aristotelian Reliance
11:02 No Concilliar Decision on everything
18:12 Quick Summary of the three councils
19:23 EO affirm Chalcedon through C2
22:20 OO supposedly have no apologetics contra-islam
26:00 Product or Subject?
37:40 Agreed Statements?
59:04 Eutyches and Two natures
1:08:26 Nestorianism and Chalcedon
1:11:15 Epinoia + En Theoria + Triadology
1:31:42 Maximus’ Challenge
1:33:50 Can Chalcedonians affirm “from two?”
1:40:56 Are “wholes” in parts?
1:43:38 OOs affirm subject change?
1:46:35 “EOs maintain one hypostasis with ek or en”
1:56:18 Tertium Quid?
2:03:53 Maximus and the Particularity of the Word and Flesh
2:09:25 Hylomorphism analogy?
2:16:00 Monophysites? Tawhid = Tewahedo 💥
2:26:55 One nature, one subject. Did anything enter the divine hypostasis?
2:31:08 Personal Names prove Persons
2:34:05 Anathematizing Theodore
2:39:51 C2 Prevents Nestorianism?
2:51:35 Aseity?
3:16:44 Hypostasis = Person/Prosopon
3:23:28 OO Working Definitions
3:30:56 Peshitta Masoretic?
3:32:23 Miscellaneous Definitions
3:33:15 Conclusion + QA 👇👇👇
3:37:51 Thoughts on Dialogues?
3:39:28 Too Complex?
3:43:00 Early dyophysite characters?
3:43:35 OO and ADS?
3:45:51 Apollonarian Forgeries?
3:47:23 Classical Theology?
3:47:50 Elaboration on Logical Priority of Essence
3:49:55 Post-Schism Chalcedonian Councils
3:52:26 Discerning True Church
3:54:38 Thoughts on Mar Mari Emmanuel?
3:56:30 View of Purgatory
3:58:15 Final Words
Important TIME STAMPS to Rewatch
1:15:23 - 1:33:47: Epinoia | En Theoria
2:51:00 - 3:16:16: Aseity
God bless this channel and Glory to him for giving us Defenders of our faith agen and iKan 🙏
I am still rewatching this. It's full of knowledge that guides us on where to look. I feel like am back to school😂so thank you so much brother agen and ikan. I will use this video as reference for many years to come. God bless you both and the true and only orthodox church🙏❤
And on additional note once you truly understand the miaphysite christology you will realize there is no other way of understanding christology better or more clearly than that. Our christology can stand tall in every criticism because of how detailed it is and it shows how much care the church fathers have put to it. I pray we all have there wisdom and strength of faith🙏
4 hours of Actual content and not a table of contents thank God for another OO W 🙏
To be honest with you guys, I don't think I can fully understand the hypostasis and prosopon thing in a hundred years, but I know for sure that my Tewahedo church is holy.
@biniam_hailu for more information I recommend checking out: “Do Hypostasis and Prosopon mean the same thing?” On the Lion’s Den channel
ua-cam.com/video/fkT76kfOzVg/v-deo.htmlsi=vt6SElfUVShKFO40
Think of it this way. Hypostasis=akal
person=manenet
@@DoomkingBalerdroch thank you for that
Confusing
Fantastic stream. God bless.
Great video, God bless you guys!
May the Holy Spirit of truth guide our understanding of both positions and lead us to Truth!
Great stream, thank you guys! May the Lord bless your work! OO always 🙏🏻
I'm on the EO side. I have a few questions but first I want to say that I can appreciate that you guys have done a good job defending your religion and responding to most of the points made in the original video. It's unfortunate that the culture of the young online apologists on our side is so ready to take things personally. I hope everyone realizes at some point that according to the Scriptures and Tradition, it's WORSE to be correct and approach God with an impure heart and impatience towards others than it is to simply be cold.
Here are my questions:
Could you give a brief description of your version of theosis? Also, if it can't be said that two Nature's persist out of the Hypostatic Union, aren't you forced to deny that the assumed human nature and the eternal Divine nature do not persist after It as well? If you confess they persist, isn't it just superstitious and petty word games to avoid using the number 2 when you're counting and distinguishing by affirming the persistence of the two Nature's after the Hypostatic Union?
Starting at 2:01:00, it seems to me like you reproduce in substance the Chalcedonian position. If the natures (and hypostases, according to your metaphysical system) don't collapse into one and retain their particularity and quality, you're enumerating two natures even if predicating them onto a single hypostasis. Or are you saying the substantial, concrete natures are metaphysically abolished and only the superficial appearances are retained?
@@Jy3pr6to say set of qualities being retained is enumerating natures, is to reduce nature to a set of natural qualities.
@@Miaphysite3 You successfully answered one of the horns of the dilemma...
@@Jy3pr6so they didn't reproduce in substance the Chalcedonian position.
If you paid enough attention. From two opposites (hypostases) result one composite hypostasis. Composed of flesh/soul and Logos. Thus the whole is enumerated, retaining all set of natural qualities in the system of composition, for the flesh didn't become Logos or vice versa, but the Logos and flesh are enumerated as One, the Incarnafe Logos in the flesh. Or the Logos together with the flesh by composition.
@@Miaphysite3 Hence the two horns of my dilemma, the second of which you haven't responded to. I'm not saying that snarkilly. I'd like to know your answer
In regards to the 16:50 mark, even Maximus the Confessor (and Aquinas) affirm that hypostatic properties are manifest even in the particularities of the bodily elements. For instance, Maximus states that a “slanted nose” is an individuating physical property. In this sense, even Christ Humanity is an “individual” but not as constituting His individuation. For from all Eternity, He is the Logos of the Father and this constitutes his Hypostasis. Christ is only known rightly as inseparable from his Eternal Generation. For that quantitative extension of His Body has no existence seperable from the Logos. I can mentally conceptualized all the human properties of nature in Christ but I cannot see Christ (Divinity anointing humanity) apart from His Eternal Suppositum. “YH has become my YH-Shua.” Even Yeshua cannot be apprehended apart from his formal identity as YHWH.
“We once regarded Christ according to the flesh but we do so no longer.” (Imagining him by individuating properties and reducing him to a mere man)
I know you guys have some agreement on this. Just not sure where we differ yet. I will keep watching.
Wonderful video, May God preserve you guys and keep bringing fruitful videos for the Orthodox Church!!
God bless you all!
I appreciate this. Will help me understand more about what you guys believe.
In regards to your understanding of the EED at the 15 minute mark, it must be noted that Neo Palamites affirm 2 res while, what I consider to be faithful orthodoxy, Palamism as such does not confirm two res but one. This, my series on the EED proves from the writings of the Fathers as you also demonstrate.
St Mark of Ephesus says notional by the way
Jay takes an L
Brothers u killed it !
God bless u all
God bless u brethren ☦️❤️..
Thank you Agen and ikan
May the God of St. Cyril, St. Discord, and St. Severus bless each of you. You have no idea how much I am motivated to understand and defend my Orthodox church.
great content. learned so much. more please
May God protect you 🙏
Good Job Pope ikan and Agen.
god bless
Great video, God bless 🙏
God Keep you my brothers.
Great work
What should I read in order to judge myself? Give me like everything there is tonread for christology
Who is the saint on the iKan icon?
Perhaps a transcript will be made available later, but does anyone know if my questions asked in chat around 1:16:00 were answered on stream?
Soldiers of the Lord ✝
Create a website please 😢
God bless. May the Lord protect His One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Orthodox Church. May the heresy of Chalcedon which attempted to dissolve Christ, our One Lord, be trampled underfoot speedily.
1 John 4:3 (DRA)
"And every spirit that dissolveth Jesus, is not of God: and this is Antichrist, of whom you have heard that he cometh, and he is now already in the world."
Do you know that the original language of the epistle you quoted is Greek and not English? The Greek word used there has nothing to do with whatever it is you are implying here. Furthermore, one could argue that it is the monophysites who heretically dissolve two natures into one.
@ I don’t think you know what the word dissolves means. It isn’t my translation. It’s the Roman church’s translation. Take it up with them.
@@MinaDKSBMSB when you dissolve sugar in tea you no longer have two things, don't you? So who's dissolving what here? I think the monophysites clearly don't understand that Jesus Christ's Incarnation means that He is consubstantial with both God the Father and us, humans, i.e. He has 2 natures. Not that hard to understand, yet the pride of the monophysite heretics won't allow them to see the light of Truth.
God bless
Set up a debate with Jay dyer
I know you already talked to him for 9 minutes but im talking a proper 3 hour debate with neutral moderators something well organised.
Also i was curious how old are you ?
Doesn't make any deferent how old is he. He is the decendant of Saint Athanasius , Saint Cyril , and Saint Dioscoros. Dyer will never dare to debate him.Blessed be our mother of the martyrs the Holy Coptic Orthodox church.
Don't tell me to set up the debate with the guy who said "I dont have to talk to you". Go over to Dyer and go tell him to set something up look what hes gonna say.
Why are you telling Agen to set up a debate? He’d love to debate Dyer formally, Jay Dyer is the one that blocked him and said he doesn’t want to have a discussion with him. Go ask Jay to debate Agen
@Queenofegypt5 I didn't say it made a difference on anything I'm just curious
Stop being so defensive .
@@OrthodoxTitan
I remember on the Sam episodes one of them said he was a young 19 year old I think. It could've been IKan.....?
I was in awe of the young age and such knowledge and eloquence in their defence of the faith.
Reminiscent of the young St Athanasius the Apostolic.
God bless them all 🙏
Came to this video genuinely trying to choose between EO and OO. I left with the confirmation I needed. Thank you so much for this video. It showed me EO is the true church and the way to go
Thank you bros
For bless
What is a heretic ?
a someone who have a false teachings
@@Yafiet1 no it’s someone who knows the truth but still rejects it
@@JIGAK1 sure
Another classic OO fail😂. Got halfway though and gave up on how bad the quote mining is and the lack of knowledge on basic metaphysics. You were right, you don’t understand the metaphysics
You should make a video substantiating why exactly we are “quote miners” and our metaphysical ignorance! Good luck
We are waiting the video where you will explain the errors. Seriously. I am EO but but I have studied the issue a lot and OO seems to be correct. Why does not not EO theologians answer to this videos seriously?
Just set up a debate
ua-cam.com/video/6rEhZW1vYLU/v-deo.html&ab_channel=ApostolicOrthodoxy
They will never debate our O O servants because they know that they will be smashed
EO will never dare to debate
@@ApostolicOrthodoxy you just made to many mistakes and then brush them off after watching this I see why jay kicked you and the point of mode yes it can mean other things but he was talking about it in a contexts so for you to just bring up mode and all it’s definitions shows me that you want to just argue but you know what you could go set up a moderator debate jay does those and prove you point so y’all both and flush out the arguments
@EliteBaby-bh7zq Agreed. Jay called him on juggling what was accepted at the 5th council then said it doesn’t matter and put that on Jay while granting history lol.
Awesome job.