Though the Orthodox saints condemned usury, the Orthodox were generally smart enough not to make jewish banking widespread. From the Byzantines, Ezra Pound derived his no-violent formula for controlling the Jews. "The answer to the Jewish problem is simple," he said. "Keep them out of banking, out of education, out of government." And this is how simple it is.
*‼📒Timestamps:* 27:00 the Orthodox World 27:10 St. Petersburg: Russian Orthodox Church, plaques celebrating Russian victories 28:50 Orthodox Churches are national churches 29:05 tribealism, Macedonia 31:21 China: Chinese Patriotic Society 33:43 Germany 34:00 Napoleon 34:40 List: railroads and tariffs Zollunion 36:00 List, Bismark, HitIer, Germany in the 1930s 38:20 Charlottesville Protests and clashs, a trap Set Up bs the J.mayor and the black deputy mayor 40:03 Ottoman Empire: ban on usury, the Armenians however were allowed usury 41:35 Cosimo di Medici invited the J.s back to Florence 42:45 the beginning of capitalism in Europe 44:00 the Renaissance was an attemp to overthrow the Christian order 44:20 usury definition: interest on a loan, over time compound interest is unpayable 45:20 the Fugger family, prided themselves to Charge the Habsburgs never more than 6% 46:50 an interest that is not compound is called a fee and is legitimate
@George Raptis That is because Orthodox think they are perfect, and they Catholic Church is evil. However, on several occasions in the Middle Ages Popes saved Orthodoxy. Besides, right now there is a huge schism between Constantinople and Russia. Orthodoxy lacks Catholicism (the word means "according to the whole) and they are national churches which are fighting against one another. Besides, Orthodoxy has always been beholden to corrupt Byzantine Emperors and they are now beholden to Putin.
@@thomasjhenniganw well if you would know what catholics have done during crusades and ww2 you would understand why orthodox think they are evil. Now they are, through subversion, spreading ecumenism.
@@cononiconium5059 when did Jay ask Jones to debate? Would you also happen to know if Jay has ever challenged Brother Peter Dimond to a debate? I'm sure he'd jump at the chance. ua-cam.com/video/_35whxfeY2I/v-deo.html
@@bamajc777 that's what you were taught it is. Main bastion against Islam was Orthodox Christianity, and those crusader fuckers pillaged Orthodox lands.
Please equalize the two volumes! I listen on phones and E.Michael Jones is far louder and it's painful with the dialogue from too quiet to tooo loud. Thank you for posting!
Horrible sound balancing. Disorganized. The interviewer has EMJ all over the map. The title promised some discussion about Eastern Orthodoxy. What scant comments were made showed what I suspected, and that is that EMJ's scholarly research has not reached Orthodox Christianity in any depth. You do find out that the Armenian Orthodox became the "Jews of Byzantium" because they managed to incorporate usury into their social system. All in all not a very satisfactory use of EMJ's time and the listener's attention.
I'm still trying to find his take on eastern orthodoxy...I'm drawn to it for some reason and know nothing about it. I've been going to an Episcopal Church...Though I love many of the families we've met there - I'm not loving the church or the teachings unfortunately. Nor the homosexual clergy...Deeply upsetting. Grief. Anxiety.... Stress.
Jones is wrong about orthodoxy, he uses the Jerusalem Bible a completely new world order bible that uses the alexandrian new testament text this bible breaks from Catholic tradition and uses the messoretic ordering and numbering of the psalms, breaking the tradition of the Saints. Jones has great work, but he doesn't understand True Orthodoxy, he doesn't understand or comprehend the evils of the Papacy, they call Pascha, easter etc. He is one to talk about nationalism when he supports a militarized Church known as the Roman Catholic Church with it's head the Pope. Look at how disillusioned he is and most catholics are with the Papacy. Orthodoxy doesn't have this problem. Orthodoxy is the true Catholic Church.
The thing is, there's been so much intermarriage between so many ethnic groups now. The ethnic Catholics have the best chance of survival because they have religion as a bond. I don't know about the others.
It's a false religion. God allowed the eastern Schismatics to fall under Islam and Communism. Bad branches produce bad fruits and wither. Anyone who chooses to leave the singular body of Christ is as a withering branch.
We fought and survived both communism, which came from the West, and islam, which came from the East, and proved our faith, while defending whole of Europe. "Blessed is the man that endureth temptation: for when he is tried, he shall receive the crown of life, which the Lord hath promised to them that love him." James 1:12 If you want to judge bad fruits coming from bad branches i advise you to look around yourself and see what's happening in your own garden, the Western world. God Bless.
That's not the point, you had to go through the suffering because you abandoned the Church. Italy and France and Spain did not suffer nearly as much. You didn't "endure" temptation but gave into it. You embraced communism and ethno-nationalism to this very day. The Balkans despise each other to this very day. They cannot agree on anything. This is not the legacy of a true church of Christ.
Some ethnic groups coming to America made it their business to adapt quickly. They made it a priority to learn English, assimilate the customs. They had to in order to find work. Etnic groups coming to the Southern part of the US became American quickly, while those in the North did not. You have the French Creole resulting from a melding of Spanish, French, Black. The German and Poles in northern Pennsylvania. It was only in the northern cities where you had ethnic ghettos. The flag that the US cavalry used in the taming of the West was the Polish red and white flag. Irish fought in the Civil War. Some of these ethnics went West on the wagon train. American character: rugged individualist, capitalist, self-reliant, quick to get to the point, believers in the US Constitution. These ethnic groups came with their hopes and dreams. They forged the American character
Orthodoxy has no centralized power on purpose. This is not a weakness but it’s strength. Just as the original apostolic church had no central power but rather made decisions by counsel, so do the Orthodox today. The Roman Church will be replaced by the original church established by the apostles in the Orthodox Church. The Roman Church has lost its way and deserves to pass away.
@Max Wylde Yes it's a catholic document and both east and west were in union when it was compiled. Rejecting the Roman Catholic doctrine of the successors of Peter being ruler and king of the church is not calling God a liar, it is saying that there is more than one credible way to read it. If you read any Greek at all you can see the name Peter(petros) and the rock(petra) are both distinct words for different things. It has been taught that the Petra was the confession of faith that Jesus was the son of God, and upon this confession the church was built. So you can just jump to saying that God is a liar because they dont believe the first interpretation. Very amateur.
@Max Wylde The issue is that you're reading it with a lens and presupposition and not seeing this passage for what it really is. This is the first time someone says that Jesus is Son of God. Christ gives Peter his name, gives him authority to bind and loose, and the keys to the kingdom of heaven. This is the office of the Bishop. Every Bishop holds this power to bind and loose. If it was anything more, then there would be no reason for ecumenical councils or synods. You'd also have to explain how James oversaw the council of Jerusalem and not Peter. And again, you'd have to explain how Peter was corrected by Paul for temporarily teaching a false binding doctrine that all gentiles had to be circumcised and observe the law before they became members in Christ. Peter believed that without this you couldn't be part of Christs covenant. Dont forget that before Peter was executed in Rome, his See where he was first Bishop at was Antioch. Are you in communion with the Antiochian See? Please tell me where Peter ever claims any superiority over the apostles. I'm not saying Peter didnt play a crucial role in spreading the Gospel and defending the faith. Of course he did, that's why hes a saint in the east too. Perhaps you should meditate on 1 Peter 2:25. Last thing I have to say is, petros and Petra, are both distinct words in the same sentence. They are literally the opposite in terms of their size. You dont have to be an expert in Greek.
@Max Wylde The Orthodox believe in Primus inter pares (first among equals) who is nowadays called the Ecumenical Patriarch. The interpretation of Matthew until the Donation of Pepin, the creation of the papal states, and the takeover of the Franks in Rome was that the Bishop of Rome was the first among equals--a Primacy of honor, not Church supremacy. Both east and west understood this. Not the Vatican 1 interpretation of the Bishop of Rome being the King of the Church. That's reserved for Christ. When Rome separated from the other 4 Patriarchal Sees, the first among equals title was then given to Constantinople. So yes there is an understanding of a head of the church, but only in matters of honor. For example, the first among equals can call for a council, will have precedence to celebrate the liturgy, and authorize a whole new See to be formed (like Moscow for ex). I dont want to make this long. But the holy catholic apostolic church is a collegial tradition, not monarchy. In context, the odds are against the interpretation Roman Catholics give to Matthew. The Eastern church still maintains communion with a first among equals which once belonged to Rome since in the early centuries she had that honor and was considered the true defender of Orthodoxy. The creation of the papal states, the Popes insertion of the filioque, and the claim of universal jurisdiction over the whole church led to the schism, which led to Rome losing primacy of being first of equals. The Apostles spread the gospels in every direction and appointed their own bishops after their own apostolic name. They all died for Christ and none ever claimed to be superior over the other. Papal monarchy can be none other than innovation. I hope I've at least made this somewhat understandable.
@Max Wylde The primacy of honor is how the church even the See of Rome understood it for the first 9 centuries. Jesus did say it so as that, and that is how he meant it. If you're telling me that we have to wait for Jesus to literally spoon feed us every word that justifies your doctrine, then you are no better than the Muslim who says "tell me where did Jesus say I am God, worship me." As a matter of fact you are in a worse position by definition. Sorry to say it like this but if you're going to point at others for disunity, look at none other than the modern "church" of Roman Catholicism. After Vatican 2, any aspirations of Rome holding claim to being the only church were taken behind the barn and shot. That council contradicts centuries of Roman catholic doctrine, and RC church fathers. It is a new religion, even more apostate then the previous schismatic one. And Francis, being the ultimate clown of this show, is only just the result of how bad we can be misled when we leave Christs teaching. Roman Catholics are torn between themselves over sedevacantism, traditionalism, old Catholicism, and the new religion of the Novus Ordo. You're kidding yourself if you boast of unity. As a matter of fact I consider Vatican 2 ironically to be a good thing, as it is God himself who made an example of just how many straws Rome was building itself on this whole time.
Max Wylde Muh keys. You’d have a better argument if you acknowledged Peter in Antioch, which Catholics never do. It’s like you’re all ignorant or dishonest. Papists are apostates and they’re directly responsible for the mess that is Protestantism. Wake up.
I'm still trying to find his take on eastern orthodoxy...I'm drawn to it for some reason and know nothing about it. I've been going to an Episcopal Church...Though I love many of the families we've met there - I'm not loving the church or the teachings unfortunately. Nor the homosexual clergy...Deeply upsetting. Grief. Anxiety.... Stress.
It's a heretical sect that leads to hell. Catholicism is the only true religion. Look here to see how to be saved and look at Vaticancatholic.com as well. www.mostholyfamilymonastery.com/catholicchurch/eastern-orthodoxy/?WPhp&Theme2020
American ethnic neighborhoods were only a temporary phenomenon that served a temporary purpose, i.e. camaraderie before the European immigrants learned English and American customs. The American melting pot of mixing ethnic neighborhoods into the suburbs is a natural phenomenon and it is not a problem. Forced integration of groups who do not mix well is a problem...and that contributed to the flight to the suburbs for those who could afford it.
There is an overarching Orthodox Church, church of Albania and church of Russia are both orthodox Christian but under different jurisdictions that are distinguished by languages and regions. If you ask a Russian, Greek, or an Albanian what church they follow they’ll say the Orthodox Church or the true church, they won’t say the church of their nation. The Catholic Church has a pope who says heaven and hell doesn’t exist, that evolution is real, that sodomy should be accepted, he placed a statue of moloch in front of the colosseum, and that we should have open borders. he inverts Christianity and preaches globalism. And the Catholic Church does serve a nation, it’s recognized as the Vatican and Rome, throughout history the Catholic Church only served the interest of the Italian elite and that’s why people left it. Because they were lying to their congregation and told them they would rot in purgatory forever if they didn’t pay the pope money. instead of just having separate districts that are different culturally and in language and maintaining unity with a devout clergy who uphold the churches teachings and practices, the Catholics instead have centralized point of authority (the pope and Rome) of which is and has been corrupted. It’s why having a pope is wrong, whats right is having a church hierarchy thats dispersed among people of all tribes, that doesn’t centralize power, but is required to uphold and maintain the teaching and is upheld by a global council of clergy leaders who can direct the church on a global scale.
German-American neighborhoods were not all Catholic. They were at least half Lutheran, or more than half. It would be bizarre for Catholics if they did not integrate into mixed American neighborhoods. After a generation or two, there is no reason to maintain ethnic neighborhoods, when the similarities of European backgrounds are compatible and the ethnic groups intermarry. The problems with the Catholic Church certainly began prior to Vatican II (especially with the errors of Russia), but V2 propelled those problems forward in a dramatic way. The end of ethnic American neighborhoods is not a problem.
He seems to misunderstand that the separate names for the Orthodox Church in a different nation is a sign of a schism between the churches. the different names indicate the culture and language that the clergy use, it does not mean that the state runs the church though the state may promote the church like in Russia, but this is because the heads of state are orthodox and want to promote traditionalism. The example he gave with The Church of England is different from the Catholic Church because it changed its teaching to where they now accepted divorce, as a result of the selfish king who wanted to leave his wife. If you compared the teachings of the church of Serbia from the church of Russia you would find little difference other than language and maybe architecture style, but they’re essentially both orthodox. Compare the Catholics in Ireland to the Catholics in Mexico and you’ll find small difference like these but they’re essentially the same thing. We don’t have a pope like Catholics do, we have different patriarchs and archbishops who are over a nation or region that maintain the teachings of the Orthodox Church in their jurisdictions. The rankings of bishops are different based on the population of their jurisdiction. Patriarch Kyrill for example is head of the largest jurisdiction of the Orthodox Church which is russia while an Archbishop Anastasios is head of Albania which is a smaller jurisdiction. All the orthodox churches of all nations and regions have an archbishop overseeing the Orthodox Church of that jurisdiction and they’re responsible for upholding unity of the church by insuring the truth and unity of the faith and practices of their diocese is upheld to the standards of the orthodox church worldwide. When faced with heresy or disunity, the patriarchs and archbishops meet together in Whats known as Ecumenism. And council meetings are held every few years, where the heads of the clergy of different nations meet.
Dr. Jones, with all due respect, when America was 90 percent white your triple metal pot theory was tenable. However, given the demographic decline of the white population, the rise in multi-racialism via mass immigration and the lack of religiosity amongst all racial groups, you're left with racial collectivism. And in a country dominated by collectivism, individualism is suicide for the white population.
E Michael Jone's is a good history professor, but he is not capable of discussing the full complexity of our financial system in the US. Overall interesting comparison to Yugoslavia that I never even considered as a reasoning for the breakup of that country. Thanks for posting.
Gr8 info as Usual! However, CORRECTION 48:00 he misses the Parable of the Talents true meaning, which is to invest the Tithes per Nehemiah 12, 13 and Parables of the Sowers (i.e. invest it into those people and activities which Grow the Master's Church, not the people's own bank / stock accounts). Most of you and the rest of the world are / have-been getting punished with schisms and heresies, becoming enslaved, as prophesied, because you collectively disobey the 10 Commandments not to steal (from music ministers and other Church ordained), bear false witness (against the same music ministers, whom you all treated and still treat like serfs), and kill (because your stinginess with your Tithes does indeed kill us), covet (you envy our musical spiritual gifts, so you mal-treat and deny our just wages). "Thou shalt not muzzle the ox that treads the grain". "The laborer earns his wage"...all part of the Parables of the Sower and the Talents. By refusing to support our spiritual good works, you destroy the world, and earn only more punishment / enslavement for yourselves, yet you call yourselves "Catholic"...preferring Kumbaya merely to skimp on money, instead of the more-expensive Traditional Liturgical arts. So you end up dumbing down your own congregations, and driving away your own youth, and yet you all complain of reduced attendance. Neh 12, 13 tells you why reduced attendance is linked manifestly to your state of worship music, yet (most of) your Priests don't even listen to this Scripture when it's presented to them, because they don't want to upset the status quo nor risk any of their own money. So they / you all are like the 3rd (bad) steward, whom God casts out to grid your teeth. And you all look the other way while the pirates destroy our income more....so more of this cries out to Heaven, and you all get what you deserve. Wake up, repent, atone to us, and be saved. None of this talk of Usury or Orthodox divisiveness will convert anyone in sufficient numbers fast enough to save you from self-destruction by 2050, so you had better stop lording over us music ministers as if we are serfs. Obey Christ, then you'll get somewhere, cheezus!
Spain and France has many wars, Portugal and Spain competed for imperial power, Spain has allied with Protestant England against France before. Catholic Austria united with Protestant Germany to help them invade the Catholic French. Italy has gone to war with the French before. the Catholic nations still fought amongst themselves in fact they created two different popes at one point in history so his argument that having a centralized church authority will allow peace and prosperity fails to uphold. Orthodox Russia assisted Orthodox Ethiopia from invasion, slavery, and colonialism and Russia assisted Ethiopia because Ethiopia is orthodox as well, two orthodox nations that are completely different culturally and racially united based on being apart of the same overarching church. People still recognize this fundamental similarity it all depends on the leaders in charge. There’s great catholic leaders who unite their people and others that didn’t. The Catholics are using their followers catholic identity to push globalization which I know your against.
He's wrong about Eastern Orthodoxy. The Church was governed by conciliarism - that means by Ecumenical Council. The Roman Church broke with that and started to style itself as the authoritive head of the Church without any basis in scripture or tradition. That's what led to the Pope adding the heresy of the Filioque and eventually the Great Schism of the Church in the 11th C. If the Orthodox Church lacks centralised leadership, it's because Rome destroyed the institution of the Ecumenical Council.
There was no claim to papal infallibility or to the type of authority the Papacy now claims for itself. The Patriarch of Rome was considered the most senior of the Patriarchates, but it's statues was largely honorific. It was essentially the first among equals, until Rome tied itself to the fortunes of the Frankish Empire, at which point it felt emboldened to style itself as the head of the Church. The only divorces recognized by the Eastern Orthodox Church are ones owing to infidelity on the part of the woman, which is scriptural and in accordance with Christ's explicit teaching. The issue of contraception in Orthodoxy is mute.
@@sumabus-9699 On what basis do you presume that Orthodoxy is mute about contraceptives? How mute is Catholic leadership when confronted with allegations of systematic practice of pedophilia?
Orthobro lies ! Tell lies to each other, you will feel better. The filoloque is no heresy mister ignorant, no one worships the pope, contraception is a sin, as is divorce.
Franjo Tudman is not a credible source and Jones's lack of understanding Yugoslav history, Macedonian in particular, shows. The analogies he uses here do not apply at all. Oh, he is wrong about Bosnia too. I am not trolling... really disappointed with the level of knowledge.
John Thomas Cameron. Are you listening? I know you have your hand on this logos rising. HUD destroyed you after personally dedicating your own sweat for 3 Jews, for 25 years. You were their useful idiot. The front man. You, personally loved helping human beings.
The Catholic Church is highly centralised and hierarchical. I don't understand his point about subsidiarity being a natural fit for Catholics. The Baptist church for instance is much more compatible with subsidiarity.
Orthodox Patriarchates are national unlike the unversalist RC system. Thus they lack the unity that we see eg that Poland, (Germany!) and Ireland share. That is why Russia didn't care when Austria declared war on Serbia, or when Christians were persecuted in the Middle East, Russia;s yearning for Constantinople has only been for control of the Dardanells. Equaly Greece was in full support of the NATO bombardment of Serbia...
Joanne you are clueless. Russia and Greece both harbor a lot of resentment against the West ever since Clinton and NATO bombed churches, schools, and hospitals in Serbia.
That is interesting and I have wondered about who was behind that Norman invasion. Normans came out of Orkney and before that Norway and maybre Denmark. I am interested in any connection between the Tribe of Dan/Denmark and the Phoenicians/Venetians and Jews.
I love E Michael Jones he is a brilliant and moral man but he is wrong about the Catholic Church being the true church. Orthodox Church is the true church founded by the apostles..
Love Dr Jones and respect his opinions, but to shrink Luther's grasp of salvation; "justification by faith alone" to a petty money grab, a mere "looting operation" is disingenuous and unfortunate.
I would like to comment on the Eastern Orthodox racial issue. Their theory is that basing a church on a race is to favor cultural preservation of their traditional cultural heritage and not racial self-worship there is a difference here that the western mentality has difficulty comprehending or accepting; I can understand given the difference with Roman Catholicism.
When the Pope left his four brother Patriarchs... Who's Schismatic? Note: in 2016 the Vatican admitted... "...no Pope ever exercised canonical authority over the Churches of the East." See Cheiti Agreement. Paragraph 19 on Vatican website.
If E. Michael Jones and Jay Dyer had a debate, it would make it easier for me to determine what church I should join. Out of all the modern apologists, it seems like Jones and Dyer have the best understanding of their own sect. When I listen to Mike I favor Catholicism. When I listen to Jay I favor Orthodoxy. An East vs. West debate would be legendary, and I think the overall result would be a bunch of former Christians converting to one church or the other. We are so deep into secularism that schismatic-style debates might actually invigorate a deeper interest in Jesus. Dyer and Jones are so on-point though that they're probably equally nervous of each other.
bawsack69 Oh, stop. You can’t defend that position based on historical evidence or teachings. It’s completely anarchistic. The Orthodox Church gave you the Bible, which you’d know if you bothered studying Church history.
Debating is generally not the Orthodox style. If you are interested in the Orthodox Church, find one near you and attend some of the services. But the simple historical fact is this - the Church was founded and has always continued to function as "a Eucharistic community centered around the Bishop." In the Book of Acts, the apostles set up local Churches based around a bishop in different cities/regions. So, this continues even today - the Churches of Jerusalem, Antioch, Alexandria, Greece, Moscow, Constantinople, etc. Rome was simply one of these Churches, but began to deviate from the Orthodox Catholic Faith, eventually going into schism in 1054 and breaking communion with ALL of the others. Today Rome has become basically a completely different religion. Meanwhile the Orthodox Churches continue in the exact same faith, doctrines, and dogmas as we have since the beginning.
I was in the same boat and At this point I see Catholicism as the greater case. Never listened much to jones till now but listened to dyer regularly . If you really want to see a clash between Catholicism and Orthodoxy their is a debate between Eric Ybarra and jay dyer . Eric Ybarra has a very strong grasp on church history. In my opinion, dyers position lives on presupposition. Though, he does use history and philosophy in his videos. He essentially presupposes his church is correct and then uses that to judge points of history. It can really be seen when looking at the supremacy of the papacy. He agrees that the papacy as understood by Roman Catholics is their in church history but it’s just simply wrong. It was merely an evolution. As if the Holy Spirit slowly lead the west into heresy or something. In my search I used the commonitory. Which stresses universality , antiquity , and consent. Which papal supremacy has. But jay has to reject the commonitory when it comes to the papacy because he calls it simply wrong. It’s similar to Mormons when we have literally no evidence for nephite or lamanite civilization as described in the Book of Mormon but believing it still. The church says it is true so it is true.
When he talks about German Catholics, I think of three graves in a Cemetery here in Milwaukee, which remain freshly decorated although the men died in the 90s. They are the graves of three German men who joined the Schoenstatt Fathers just as WWII was starting. I try to imagine how hard it was to be a German in Milwaukee, with its German newspapers during and between those wars. All three men almost seemed to be seeking sanctuary in the church.
Germany had german tribes not foreign ethnicities. These were all Germanic tribes!!!!!! That's why they could become Germany. It wouldn't be possible if there were completely foreign ethnicities in Germany!!!!
"...there's no over-arching Orthodox Church." I really love all the great work, the courage of Mr. Jones to speak out against Judaism (an evil religion) and Jewish influence upon Christian cultures and societies through the ages. But. This statement clearly shows he does not understand the nature of Mother Church, the Holy Orthodox Church, as described and understood by the Church Fathers themselves. In his desire for ABSOLUTE clarity, which is what traditional Romanists fall prey to (they don't merely seek Truth, they seek, desperately, the CERTAINTY of Truth), he cannot fathom, due to his Western mind and Catholic propaganda.. he cannot imagine a Church that is not merely defined by official statements and bureaucratic officialdom, but rather BOTH a bureaucratic and public, outward, communion between Orthodox national 'churches' and a unity in spirit, in belief, in practice, and in confession, in the Symbol of the Faith, the Nicean-Constantinopoltian Creed. There is nothing unified about the Roman sect and its various dioceses, sub-groups, schismatics, nationalist Eastern Rite parishes, schismatics, and sedevacantists. The idea that somehow they are "one" and "unified" is an abject joke and the height of self-delusional and willful denial. Heck, they don't even share the same Creed. Eastern Catholic parishes, many of them, don't even say the Filioque. In the end, the Romanist does not care about "all that." All that matters is bowing the knee to the god-king, the Pope, and suddenly, magically, you are One with all the rest.
Lane Cobble It seems like you don’t understand Catholicism or the history of the Davidic Kingdom. Jesus was a Davidic King and thus established a Kingdom modeled after that of David’s. The mother of the King was the Queen for the Davidic Kings, which is one reason why Mary is the Queen if Christ’s Kingdom. Also, Davidic Kings established prime ministers to rule in their stead while they were away from the Kingdom. Compare Isaiah 22:22 to Matthew 16:18-19. Jesus clearly established Peter as the Prime Minister of the Apostles, as was modeled by Davidic Kings. To be in communion with Peter’s authority is to be in communion with Christ.
Riiiiight. The same "Davidic Kingdom" which God did not even want to set up. It was only because of the lack of faith of the Israelites, who were demanding an earthly king, that God gave in. So, compare the Roman sect all you want to the Davidic Kingdom, but you're comparing it to something ungodly, something God did not want. Jesus did not "clearly" establish Peter as King. Which every single patriarchate outside of Rome (even the non-Chalcedonian sects) never, ever recognized. If you have the balls, read Guettee's "The Papacy." The Truth will set you free.
Lane Cobble You lack charity, that’s a pity. It’s hard to have an argument with someone with such angst. What does it matter that God didn’t want to originally set a king over Israel? He still did, and then promised that a King from David’s line would rule forever. That has come to pass. Jesus didn’t enter into history in a vacuum, He came into a time and place to fulfill and renew a Covenant with Israel. And He established His Kingdom, the Catholic Church, with the same structure of the Kingdom before Him, with a queen mother and a prime minister. Orthodoxy, with its lack of central authority, cannot agree universally. Take contraception for instance. Some Orthodox condemn it, some say it’s okay. Any institution with a lack of clear authority will fall to division. Clearly the God of the Universe would not fail to establish a clear figure of authority in establishing His Church. And I’ll read anything you throw my way, Christians don’t fear the truth.
What does it matter that God did not want to set a king over Israel? Seriously? You're asking "what does it matter what God wanted?" Wow. Enuf said. You clearly don't understand that God's Will is best. You think Romanists "agree universally." Then you are lying to yourself, lost in delusion. I know, because I was Catholic once. The Orthodox all have the original Creed. Catholics don't. Period. He did establish an Authority. Christ, who is The Rock. The Apostles, who are the stones built upon that Rock. Upon the Rock of Christ as Lord, which Peter proclaimed. His declaration of faith was the "Rock" which Christ said He would build His Church upon. Christ did not say: "Your name is Peter and upon YOU I will build my Church." Christ said: "Your name is Peter and upon this rock (the declaration of faith you just stated), I will build my Church." Ok, if you say you have the courage, then read Guetee's "The Papacy." Here it is: There was NO man on earth more Catholic than Réné-Francois Guettée. orthodoxinfo.com/inquirers/Guettee_ThePapacy.pdf
Obviously what God wants matters most. I was asking why it mattered when He still set a king over Israel. The various kings' behavior showed why God was sorrowful that Israel asked for a king, but salvation history continued on in the context of a kingdom. God's original wish doesn't nullify that. He wanted to be their King, and he used their misguided wish to end up as their King, so your shrugging off of the Davidic kingdom means nothing. It was a stepping stone in God's plan. Catholics do agree universally. Provide some evidence of what you think we disagree on. "Being Catholic once" doesn't mean much. Jesus changed Simon's name to Peter, which is rock. In Aramaic it would have sounded something like, "You are Rock, and on this Rock I build my Church." Of course, Christ is the cornerstone. All of Peter's authority comes from Christ, he is merely a minister of the one true Lord and King. When Christ returns, the Papacy will be void because its task of guiding the Church will be finished. The fact that the preface of the book you linked me misconstrues the Papacy as if it competes with Christ tells me all I need to know about the content of the book itself. I'll keep skimming to see if it has any redeeming qualities. In the mean time, read the prophecy of Daniel in Daniel 7. The last beast, the one overcome by the coming of the Christ, is Rome. Is it any wonder then that the seat of authority for Christ's Church is in Rome, the capital of the beast destroyed by Christ? It seems to me that you don't truly know Catholic doctrine and are shadowboxing with misconceptions, much like Protestants do, may God bless them and have them return to full communion.
It is ridiculous revisionism to assert that the American Civil War was fought over any issue more important than that of slavery. This was the raison d'etre of the Southern plantation class. The "states rights" so commonly cited as the true issue of the Civil War by historical revisionists, usually of the Lost Cause variety, is precisely the right of these states to not only practice slavery, but to expand it across the entire American hemisphere. Dr. Jones does little to help his cause by tying his argument to these specious claims.
Yeah, the American Civil War is a big weakness of Dr. Jones's arguments. I don't know why so many traditional Catholics are inclined to act like either side in the ACW had some massive moral superiority. But the South broke apart families to expand capital. How is that moral?
Though the Orthodox saints condemned usury, the Orthodox were generally smart enough not to make jewish banking widespread. From the Byzantines, Ezra Pound derived his no-violent formula for controlling the Jews. "The answer to the Jewish problem is simple," he said. "Keep them out of banking, out of education, out of government." And this is how simple it is.
The Latin Mass Essentially "sicut Judaeis non"
The Latin Mass Keep them out of your country or they will use some people to bring egalitarian revolution and to have access to the levers of power.
@mongol tyrant Hardly. But keep fast to your heresy.
Funny. The Iranians actually did the same thing in the modern day. They forced them out of banking and into honest trades.
Unfortunately they control all of these things
*‼📒Timestamps:*
27:00 the Orthodox World
27:10 St. Petersburg: Russian Orthodox Church, plaques celebrating Russian victories
28:50 Orthodox Churches are national churches
29:05 tribealism, Macedonia
31:21 China: Chinese Patriotic Society
33:43 Germany
34:00 Napoleon
34:40 List: railroads and tariffs Zollunion
36:00 List, Bismark, HitIer,
Germany in the 1930s
38:20 Charlottesville Protests and clashs, a trap Set Up bs the J.mayor and the black deputy mayor
40:03 Ottoman Empire: ban on usury, the Armenians however were allowed usury
41:35 Cosimo di Medici invited the J.s back to Florence
42:45 the beginning of capitalism in Europe
44:00 the Renaissance was an attemp to overthrow the Christian order
44:20 usury definition: interest on a loan, over time compound interest is unpayable
45:20 the Fugger family, prided themselves to Charge the Habsburgs never more than 6%
46:50 an interest that is not compound is called a fee and is legitimate
Thank you.
Hero 🙏❤️
one doesn't have to believe in complete racial-determinism to be an ethno-nationalist
E Michael Jones needs to Debate Jay dyer.
JAY wants to debate, will Jones accept?
Catholicism vs Othodoxy.
Jay dyre is suspect.
@George Raptis That is because Orthodox think they are perfect, and they Catholic Church is evil. However, on several occasions in the Middle Ages Popes saved Orthodoxy. Besides, right now there is a huge schism between Constantinople and Russia. Orthodoxy lacks Catholicism (the word means "according to the whole) and they are national churches which are fighting against one another. Besides, Orthodoxy has always been beholden to corrupt Byzantine Emperors and they are now beholden to Putin.
@@thomasjhenniganw well if you would know what catholics have done during crusades and ww2 you would understand why orthodox think they are evil. Now they are, through subversion, spreading ecumenism.
@@cononiconium5059 when did Jay ask Jones to debate? Would you also happen to know if Jay has ever challenged Brother Peter Dimond to a debate? I'm sure he'd jump at the chance. ua-cam.com/video/_35whxfeY2I/v-deo.html
@@bamajc777 that's what you were taught it is. Main bastion against Islam was Orthodox Christianity, and those crusader fuckers pillaged Orthodox lands.
Eastern Orthoxody commentary starting at 24:15.
Thank you, man.
God Bless you!
Dr E Michael Jones is absolutely brilliant! Thank you for this great interview.
A g r e e ! Whole heartily . ❤️
No he is not,a militant cathlic!USA is a christian nation,Lutheran christian.
Please equalize the two volumes! I listen on phones and E.Michael Jones is far louder and it's painful with the dialogue from too quiet to tooo loud. Thank you for posting!
Go to 30:00 mins. and Jones booms! It's painfully loud...and too quiet , with earbuds.
Horrible sound balancing. Disorganized. The interviewer has EMJ all over the map. The title promised some discussion about Eastern Orthodoxy. What scant comments were made showed what I suspected, and that is that EMJ's scholarly research has not reached Orthodox Christianity in any depth. You do find out that the Armenian Orthodox became the "Jews of Byzantium" because they managed to incorporate usury into their social system. All in all not a very satisfactory use of EMJ's time and the listener's attention.
I'm still trying to find his take on eastern orthodoxy...I'm drawn to it for some reason and know nothing about it. I've been going to an Episcopal Church...Though I love many of the families we've met there - I'm not loving the church or the teachings unfortunately. Nor the homosexual clergy...Deeply upsetting. Grief. Anxiety.... Stress.
Hey fx saw your comments in the Groyper live stream. 😊. Subbed. Thanks for posting.
Thanks Logan. Good to see you here.
Mr Jones is a gem of knowledge. Enjoy listening to him speak.
Jones is wrong about orthodoxy, he uses the Jerusalem Bible a completely new world order bible that uses the alexandrian new testament text this bible breaks from Catholic tradition and uses the messoretic ordering and numbering of the psalms, breaking the tradition of the Saints. Jones has great work, but he doesn't understand True Orthodoxy, he doesn't understand or comprehend the evils of the Papacy, they call Pascha, easter etc. He is one to talk about nationalism when he supports a militarized Church known as the Roman Catholic Church with it's head the Pope. Look at how disillusioned he is and most catholics are with the Papacy. Orthodoxy doesn't have this problem. Orthodoxy is the true Catholic Church.
The thing is, there's been so much intermarriage between so many ethnic groups now. The ethnic Catholics have the best chance of survival because they have religion as a bond. I don't know about the others.
Unfortunately, you understand nothing of Orthodox Christianity, other than that, good work.
It's a false religion. God allowed the eastern Schismatics to fall under Islam and Communism. Bad branches produce bad fruits and wither. Anyone who chooses to leave the singular body of Christ is as a withering branch.
We fought and survived both communism, which came from the West, and islam, which came from the East, and proved our faith, while defending whole of Europe.
"Blessed is the man that endureth temptation: for when he is tried, he shall receive the crown of life, which the Lord hath promised to them that love him." James 1:12
If you want to judge bad fruits coming from bad branches i advise you to look around yourself and see what's happening in your own garden, the Western world. God Bless.
That's not the point, you had to go through the suffering because you abandoned the Church. Italy and France and Spain did not suffer nearly as much.
You didn't "endure" temptation but gave into it. You embraced communism and ethno-nationalism to this very day. The Balkans despise each other to this very day. They cannot agree on anything. This is not the legacy of a true church of Christ.
Orthodox would rather stay in their monasteries
The Binary Epidemic Rome is Masonic and Satanic. You’re ignorant of Orthodox history if you’re saying such nonsense.
Love EMJ
Some ethnic groups coming to America made it their business to adapt quickly. They made it a priority to learn English, assimilate the customs. They had to in order to find work. Etnic groups coming to the Southern part of the US became American quickly, while those in the North did not. You have the French Creole resulting from a melding of Spanish, French, Black. The German and Poles in northern Pennsylvania. It was only in the northern cities where you had ethnic ghettos. The flag that the US cavalry used in the taming of the West was the Polish red and white flag. Irish fought in the Civil War. Some of these ethnics went West on the wagon train. American character: rugged individualist, capitalist, self-reliant, quick to get to the point, believers in the US Constitution. These ethnic groups came with their hopes and dreams. They forged the American character
This guy doesn't have a clue what Orthodoxy really is. Zapadniky can't wrap their mind around how the Orthodox can function as a Synodal system.
Orthodoxy has no centralized power on purpose. This is not a weakness but it’s strength. Just as the original apostolic church had no central power but rather made decisions by counsel, so do the Orthodox today.
The Roman Church will be replaced by the original church established by the apostles in the Orthodox Church.
The Roman Church has lost its way and deserves to pass away.
@Max Wylde Yes it's a catholic document and both east and west were in union when it was compiled. Rejecting the Roman Catholic doctrine of the successors of Peter being ruler and king of the church is not calling God a liar, it is saying that there is more than one credible way to read it.
If you read any Greek at all you can see the name Peter(petros) and the rock(petra) are both distinct words for different things. It has been taught that the Petra was the confession of faith that Jesus was the son of God, and upon this confession the church was built. So you can just jump to saying that God is a liar because they dont believe the first interpretation. Very amateur.
@Max Wylde The issue is that you're reading it with a lens and presupposition and not seeing this passage for what it really is. This is the first time someone says that Jesus is Son of God. Christ gives Peter his name, gives him authority to bind and loose, and the keys to the kingdom of heaven. This is the office of the Bishop. Every Bishop holds this power to bind and loose. If it was anything more, then there would be no reason for ecumenical councils or synods. You'd also have to explain how James oversaw the council of Jerusalem and not Peter. And again, you'd have to explain how Peter was corrected by Paul for temporarily teaching a false binding doctrine that all gentiles had to be circumcised and observe the law before they became members in Christ. Peter believed that without this you couldn't be part of Christs covenant.
Dont forget that before Peter was executed in Rome, his See where he was first Bishop at was Antioch. Are you in communion with the Antiochian See? Please tell me where Peter ever claims any superiority over the apostles.
I'm not saying Peter didnt play a crucial role in spreading the Gospel and defending the faith. Of course he did, that's why hes a saint in the east too. Perhaps you should meditate on 1 Peter 2:25. Last thing I have to say is, petros and Petra, are both distinct words in the same sentence. They are literally the opposite in terms of their size. You dont have to be an expert in Greek.
@Max Wylde The Orthodox believe in Primus inter pares (first among equals) who is nowadays called the Ecumenical Patriarch. The interpretation of Matthew until the Donation of Pepin, the creation of the papal states, and the takeover of the Franks in Rome was that the Bishop of Rome was the first among equals--a Primacy of honor, not Church supremacy. Both east and west understood this. Not the Vatican 1 interpretation of the Bishop of Rome being the King of the Church. That's reserved for Christ.
When Rome separated from the other 4 Patriarchal Sees, the first among equals title was then given to Constantinople. So yes there is an understanding of a head of the church, but only in matters of honor. For example, the first among equals can call for a council, will have precedence to celebrate the liturgy, and authorize a whole new See to be formed (like Moscow for ex).
I dont want to make this long. But the holy catholic apostolic church is a collegial tradition, not monarchy. In context, the odds are against the interpretation Roman Catholics give to Matthew. The Eastern church still maintains communion with a first among equals which once belonged to Rome since in the early centuries she had that honor and was considered the true defender of Orthodoxy. The creation of the papal states, the Popes insertion of the filioque, and the claim of universal jurisdiction over the whole church led to the schism, which led to Rome losing primacy of being first of equals.
The Apostles spread the gospels in every direction and appointed their own bishops after their own apostolic name. They all died for Christ and none ever claimed to be superior over the other. Papal monarchy can be none other than innovation. I hope I've at least made this somewhat understandable.
@Max Wylde The primacy of honor is how the church even the See of Rome understood it for the first 9 centuries. Jesus did say it so as that, and that is how he meant it. If you're telling me that we have to wait for Jesus to literally spoon feed us every word that justifies your doctrine, then you are no better than the Muslim who says "tell me where did Jesus say I am God, worship me." As a matter of fact you are in a worse position by definition.
Sorry to say it like this but if you're going to point at others for disunity, look at none other than the modern "church" of Roman Catholicism. After Vatican 2, any aspirations of Rome holding claim to being the only church were taken behind the barn and shot. That council contradicts centuries of Roman catholic doctrine, and RC church fathers. It is a new religion, even more apostate then the previous schismatic one. And Francis, being the ultimate clown of this show, is only just the result of how bad we can be misled when we leave Christs teaching. Roman Catholics are torn between themselves over sedevacantism, traditionalism, old Catholicism, and the new religion of the Novus Ordo. You're kidding yourself if you boast of unity.
As a matter of fact I consider Vatican 2 ironically to be a good thing, as it is God himself who made an example of just how many straws Rome was building itself on this whole time.
Max Wylde Muh keys. You’d have a better argument if you acknowledged Peter in Antioch, which Catholics never do. It’s like you’re all ignorant or dishonest. Papists are apostates and they’re directly responsible for the mess that is Protestantism. Wake up.
I'm still trying to find his take on eastern orthodoxy...I'm drawn to it for some reason and know nothing about it. I've been going to an Episcopal Church...Though I love many of the families we've met there - I'm not loving the church or the teachings unfortunately. Nor the homosexual clergy...Deeply upsetting. Grief. Anxiety.... Stress.
This blog has tons of info about the Orthodox Church. Enjoy your journey!!! www.TheOrthodoxWay.blogspot.com
It's a heretical sect that leads to hell. Catholicism is the only true religion. Look here to see how to be saved and look at Vaticancatholic.com as well. www.mostholyfamilymonastery.com/catholicchurch/eastern-orthodoxy/?WPhp&Theme2020
@@GM-uy3cm the Demon Bros are easily refuted, and not even in the RCC
American ethnic neighborhoods were only a temporary phenomenon that served a temporary purpose, i.e. camaraderie before the European immigrants learned English and American customs. The American melting pot of mixing ethnic neighborhoods into the suburbs is a natural phenomenon and it is not a problem. Forced integration of groups who do not mix well is a problem...and that contributed to the flight to the suburbs for those who could afford it.
Mix...
The...
Levels.
There is an overarching Orthodox Church, church of Albania and church of Russia are both orthodox Christian but under different jurisdictions that are distinguished by languages and regions. If you ask a Russian, Greek, or an Albanian what church they follow they’ll say the Orthodox Church or the true church, they won’t say the church of their nation. The Catholic Church has a pope who says heaven and hell doesn’t exist, that evolution is real, that sodomy should be accepted, he placed a statue of moloch in front of the colosseum, and that we should have open borders. he inverts Christianity and preaches globalism. And the Catholic Church does serve a nation, it’s recognized as the Vatican and Rome, throughout history the Catholic Church only served the interest of the Italian elite and that’s why people left it. Because they were lying to their congregation and told them they would rot in purgatory forever if they didn’t pay the pope money. instead of just having separate districts that are different culturally and in language and maintaining unity with a devout clergy who uphold the churches teachings and practices, the Catholics instead have centralized point of authority (the pope and Rome) of which is and has been corrupted. It’s why having a pope is wrong, whats right is having a church hierarchy thats dispersed among people of all tribes, that doesn’t centralize power, but is required to uphold and maintain the teaching and is upheld by a global council of clergy leaders who can direct the church on a global scale.
You left him speechless at one point lol
The loss of Sanctifying Grace is what has devastated the Catholic church.
3:54 Dear God what I wouldn't do with a time machine.
Maybe even take a trip to 1619...
German-American neighborhoods were not all Catholic. They were at least half Lutheran, or more than half. It would be bizarre for Catholics if they did not integrate into mixed American neighborhoods. After a generation or two, there is no reason to maintain ethnic neighborhoods, when the similarities of European backgrounds are compatible and the ethnic groups intermarry. The problems with the Catholic Church certainly began prior to Vatican II (especially with the errors of Russia), but V2 propelled those problems forward in a dramatic way. The end of ethnic American neighborhoods is not a problem.
He seems to misunderstand that the separate names for the Orthodox Church in a different nation is a sign of a schism between the churches. the different names indicate the culture and language that the clergy use, it does not mean that the state runs the church though the state may promote the church like in Russia, but this is because the heads of state are orthodox and want to promote traditionalism. The example he gave with The Church of England is different from the Catholic Church because it changed its teaching to where they now accepted divorce, as a result of the selfish king who wanted to leave his wife. If you compared the teachings of the church of Serbia from the church of Russia you would find little difference other than language and maybe architecture style, but they’re essentially both orthodox. Compare the Catholics in Ireland to the Catholics in Mexico and you’ll find small difference like these but they’re essentially the same thing. We don’t have a pope like Catholics do, we have different patriarchs and archbishops who are over a nation or region that maintain the teachings of the Orthodox Church in their jurisdictions. The rankings of bishops are different based on the population of their jurisdiction. Patriarch Kyrill for example is head of the largest jurisdiction of the Orthodox Church which is russia while an Archbishop Anastasios is head of Albania which is a smaller jurisdiction. All the orthodox churches of all nations and regions have an archbishop overseeing the Orthodox Church of that jurisdiction and they’re responsible for upholding unity of the church by insuring the truth and unity of the faith and practices of their diocese is upheld to the standards of the orthodox church worldwide. When faced with heresy or disunity, the patriarchs and archbishops meet together in Whats known as Ecumenism. And council meetings are held every few years, where the heads of the clergy of different nations meet.
EMJ’s blind spot when it comes to Vatican II is getting irritating.
Michael said theres no risk in a loan? There is risk....what happens if you dont get the money back....
zippycatholic.wordpress.com/2014/11/10/usury-faq-or-money-on-the-pill/#1
explains everything!
Dr. Jones, with all due respect, when America was 90 percent white your triple metal pot theory was tenable. However, given the demographic decline of the white population, the rise in multi-racialism via mass immigration and the lack of religiosity amongst all racial groups, you're left with racial collectivism. And in a country dominated by collectivism, individualism is suicide for the white population.
How can you say that there’s no risk in a loan? The risk is that you don’t get paid back
zippycatholic.wordpress.com/2014/11/10/usury-faq-or-money-on-the-pill/#1
explains everything!
E Michael Jone's is a good history professor, but he is not capable of discussing the full complexity of our financial system in the US. Overall interesting comparison to Yugoslavia that I never even considered as a reasoning for the breakup of that country. Thanks for posting.
ethnos and logos
Gr8 info as Usual! However, CORRECTION 48:00 he misses the Parable of the Talents true meaning, which is to invest the Tithes per Nehemiah 12, 13 and Parables of the Sowers (i.e. invest it into those people and activities which Grow the Master's Church, not the people's own bank / stock accounts). Most of you and the rest of the world are / have-been getting punished with schisms and heresies, becoming enslaved, as prophesied, because you collectively disobey the 10 Commandments not to steal (from music ministers and other Church ordained), bear false witness (against the same music ministers, whom you all treated and still treat like serfs), and kill (because your stinginess with your Tithes does indeed kill us), covet (you envy our musical spiritual gifts, so you mal-treat and deny our just wages). "Thou shalt not muzzle the ox that treads the grain". "The laborer earns his wage"...all part of the Parables of the Sower and the Talents. By refusing to support our spiritual good works, you destroy the world, and earn only more punishment / enslavement for yourselves, yet you call yourselves "Catholic"...preferring Kumbaya merely to skimp on money, instead of the more-expensive Traditional Liturgical arts. So you end up dumbing down your own congregations, and driving away your own youth, and yet you all complain of reduced attendance. Neh 12, 13 tells you why reduced attendance is linked manifestly to your state of worship music, yet (most of) your Priests don't even listen to this Scripture when it's presented to them, because they don't want to upset the status quo nor risk any of their own money. So they / you all are like the 3rd (bad) steward, whom God casts out to grid your teeth. And you all look the other way while the pirates destroy our income more....so more of this cries out to Heaven, and you all get what you deserve. Wake up, repent, atone to us, and be saved. None of this talk of Usury or Orthodox divisiveness will convert anyone in sufficient numbers fast enough to save you from self-destruction by 2050, so you had better stop lording over us music ministers as if we are serfs. Obey Christ, then you'll get somewhere, cheezus!
Spain and France has many wars, Portugal and Spain competed for imperial power, Spain has allied with Protestant England against France before. Catholic Austria united with Protestant Germany to help them invade the Catholic French. Italy has gone to war with the French before. the Catholic nations still fought amongst themselves in fact they created two different popes at one point in history so his argument that having a centralized church authority will allow peace and prosperity fails to uphold. Orthodox Russia assisted Orthodox Ethiopia from invasion, slavery, and colonialism and Russia assisted Ethiopia because Ethiopia is orthodox as well, two orthodox nations that are completely different culturally and racially united based on being apart of the same overarching church. People still recognize this fundamental similarity it all depends on the leaders in charge. There’s great catholic leaders who unite their people and others that didn’t. The Catholics are using their followers catholic identity to push globalization which I know your against.
He's wrong about Eastern Orthodoxy. The Church was governed by conciliarism - that means by Ecumenical Council. The Roman Church broke with that and started to style itself as the authoritive head of the Church without any basis in scripture or tradition. That's what led to the Pope adding the heresy of the Filioque and eventually the Great Schism of the Church in the 11th C. If the Orthodox Church lacks centralised leadership, it's because Rome destroyed the institution of the Ecumenical Council.
There was no claim to papal infallibility or to the type of authority the Papacy now claims for itself. The Patriarch of Rome was considered the most senior of the Patriarchates, but it's statues was largely honorific. It was essentially the first among equals, until Rome tied itself to the fortunes of the Frankish Empire, at which point it felt emboldened to style itself as the head of the Church.
The only divorces recognized by the Eastern Orthodox Church are ones owing to infidelity on the part of the woman, which is scriptural and in accordance with Christ's explicit teaching. The issue of contraception in Orthodoxy is mute.
@@sumabus-9699 On what basis do you presume that Orthodoxy is mute about contraceptives? How mute is Catholic leadership when confronted with allegations of systematic practice of pedophilia?
Sumabus - Rome worships the Pope rather than Christ.
Orthobro lies ! Tell lies to each other, you will feel better. The filoloque is no heresy mister ignorant, no one worships the pope, contraception is a sin, as is divorce.
He's wrong about everything.He's a shonk.
Franjo Tudman is not a credible source and Jones's lack of understanding Yugoslav history, Macedonian in particular, shows. The analogies he uses here do not apply at all. Oh, he is wrong about Bosnia too. I am not trolling... really disappointed with the level of knowledge.
Jones promotes Father Charles Coughlin, who promoted Hitler and Mussolini on U.S. radio broadcasts in the 1930s.
Today's Western degeneracy has proven them correct.
Now we see father Coughlin was 100% right he never supported Hitler
John Thomas Cameron. Are you listening? I know you have your hand on this logos rising. HUD destroyed you after personally dedicating your own sweat for 3 Jews, for 25 years. You were their useful idiot. The front man. You, personally loved helping human beings.
The interviewee should look for another career.
I actually think Dr. Jones is good at what he does.
The Catholic Church is highly centralised and hierarchical. I don't understand his point about subsidiarity being a natural fit for Catholics. The Baptist church for instance is much more compatible with subsidiarity.
Because we don’t believe in dialectics like you apparently do.
Monarchies are heavily centralized, still subsidiary and the superior form of government.
Orthodox Patriarchates are national unlike the unversalist RC system. Thus they lack the unity that we see eg that Poland, (Germany!) and Ireland share. That is why Russia didn't care when Austria declared war on Serbia, or when Christians were persecuted in the Middle East, Russia;s yearning for Constantinople has only been for control of the Dardanells. Equaly Greece was in full support of the NATO bombardment of Serbia...
No unity is possible either within or between any of these desert death cults.
Joanne you are clueless. Russia and Greece both harbor a lot of resentment against the West ever since Clinton and NATO bombed churches, schools, and hospitals in Serbia.
Are you trying to equate the Greek Government at the time of the bombardment of Yugoslavia with the Greek Orthodox Church?
That is interesting and I have wondered about who was behind that Norman invasion. Normans came out of Orkney and before that Norway and maybre Denmark. I am interested in any connection between the Tribe of Dan/Denmark and the Phoenicians/Venetians and Jews.
normans brought in jews to england
I love E Michael Jones he is a brilliant and moral man but he is wrong about the Catholic Church being the true church. Orthodox Church is the true church founded by the apostles..
The Catholic church is the true faith. The Pope of Rome sits on the seat of St. Peter, Rome has always held primacy over the other Sees.
* _Martin Luther enters the chat_
Love Dr Jones and respect his opinions, but to shrink Luther's grasp of salvation; "justification by faith alone" to a petty money grab, a mere "looting operation" is disingenuous and unfortunate.
The Church was awfully rich in properties. In one sense, one can say it was a looting operation but it was also a revolution against Holy Tradition.
I would like to comment on the Eastern Orthodox racial issue. Their theory is that basing a church on a race is to favor cultural preservation of their traditional cultural heritage and not racial self-worship there is a difference here that the western mentality has difficulty comprehending or accepting; I can understand given the difference with Roman Catholicism.
When the Pope left his four brother Patriarchs... Who's Schismatic?
Note: in 2016 the Vatican admitted... "...no Pope ever exercised canonical authority over the Churches of the East."
See Cheiti Agreement. Paragraph 19 on Vatican website.
@@brotherbrovet1881only one inherits the seat of Peter
Great interview. Hope more people would listen to Michael E. Jones.
1 year passed and a lot more people are! They are trying to censor him, but the cat's out of the bag.
If E. Michael Jones and Jay Dyer had a debate, it would make it easier for me to determine what church I should join. Out of all the modern apologists, it seems like Jones and Dyer have the best understanding of their own sect. When I listen to Mike I favor Catholicism. When I listen to Jay I favor Orthodoxy. An East vs. West debate would be legendary, and I think the overall result would be a bunch of former Christians converting to one church or the other. We are so deep into secularism that schismatic-style debates might actually invigorate a deeper interest in Jesus. Dyer and Jones are so on-point though that they're probably equally nervous of each other.
You don't need a church, just read the bible and follow the teachings of Christ
bawsack69 Oh, stop. You can’t defend that position based on historical evidence or teachings. It’s completely anarchistic. The Orthodox Church gave you the Bible, which you’d know if you bothered studying Church history.
Chris Anthony Jay covers the differences well. He makes sound arguments for Orthodoxy. Rome is apostate.
Debating is generally not the Orthodox style. If you are interested in the Orthodox Church, find one near you and attend some of the services. But the simple historical fact is this - the Church was founded and has always continued to function as "a Eucharistic community centered around the Bishop." In the Book of Acts, the apostles set up local Churches based around a bishop in different cities/regions. So, this continues even today - the Churches of Jerusalem, Antioch, Alexandria, Greece, Moscow, Constantinople, etc. Rome was simply one of these Churches, but began to deviate from the Orthodox Catholic Faith, eventually going into schism in 1054 and breaking communion with ALL of the others. Today Rome has become basically a completely different religion. Meanwhile the Orthodox Churches continue in the exact same faith, doctrines, and dogmas as we have since the beginning.
I was in the same boat and At this point I see Catholicism as the greater case.
Never listened much to jones till now but listened to dyer regularly . If you really want to see a clash between Catholicism and Orthodoxy their is a debate between Eric Ybarra and jay dyer . Eric Ybarra has a very strong grasp on church history.
In my opinion, dyers position lives on presupposition. Though, he does use history and philosophy in his videos. He essentially presupposes his church is correct and then uses that to judge points of history. It can really be seen when looking at the supremacy of the papacy. He agrees that the papacy as understood by Roman Catholics is their in church history but it’s just simply wrong. It was merely an evolution. As if the Holy Spirit slowly lead the west into heresy or something.
In my search I used the commonitory. Which stresses universality , antiquity , and consent. Which papal supremacy has. But jay has to reject the commonitory when it comes to the papacy because he calls it simply wrong.
It’s similar to Mormons when we have literally no evidence for nephite or lamanite civilization as described in the Book of Mormon but believing it still. The church says it is true so it is true.
When he talks about German Catholics, I think of three graves in a Cemetery here in Milwaukee, which remain freshly decorated although the men died in the 90s. They are the graves of three German men who joined the Schoenstatt Fathers just as WWII was starting. I try to imagine how hard it was to be a German in Milwaukee, with its German newspapers during and between those wars. All three men almost seemed to be seeking sanctuary in the church.
This interview just about blew my face off. I bought a couple of EMJ's books now. Good spring time reading to stir up some hate and discontent in me.
Germany had german tribes not foreign ethnicities. These were all Germanic tribes!!!!!! That's why they could become Germany. It wouldn't be possible if there were completely foreign ethnicities in Germany!!!!
The Churches need to reunify.
One mic way too low
And remember, safety is number one priority.
Bearcingetorix wrong
Germans, Italians, Polish, Irish... and French-Canadians. All Catholics.
Mr Jones is a gem of knowledge. Enjoy listening to him speak.
11:00
"...there's no over-arching Orthodox Church."
I really love all the great work, the courage of Mr. Jones to speak out against Judaism (an evil religion) and Jewish influence upon Christian cultures and societies through the ages.
But.
This statement clearly shows he does not understand the nature of Mother Church, the Holy Orthodox Church, as described and understood by the Church Fathers themselves. In his desire for ABSOLUTE clarity, which is what traditional Romanists fall prey to (they don't merely seek Truth, they seek, desperately, the CERTAINTY of Truth), he cannot fathom, due to his Western mind and Catholic propaganda.. he cannot imagine a Church that is not merely defined by official statements and bureaucratic officialdom, but rather BOTH a bureaucratic and public, outward, communion between Orthodox national 'churches' and a unity in spirit, in belief, in practice, and in confession, in the Symbol of the Faith, the Nicean-Constantinopoltian Creed.
There is nothing unified about the Roman sect and its various dioceses, sub-groups, schismatics, nationalist Eastern Rite parishes, schismatics, and sedevacantists. The idea that somehow they are "one" and "unified" is an abject joke and the height of self-delusional and willful denial.
Heck, they don't even share the same Creed. Eastern Catholic parishes, many of them, don't even say the Filioque. In the end, the Romanist does not care about "all that." All that matters is bowing the knee to the god-king, the Pope, and suddenly, magically, you are One with all the rest.
Lane Cobble It seems like you don’t understand Catholicism or the history of the Davidic Kingdom.
Jesus was a Davidic King and thus established a Kingdom modeled after that of David’s. The mother of the King was the Queen for the Davidic Kings, which is one reason why Mary is the Queen if Christ’s Kingdom. Also, Davidic Kings established prime ministers to rule in their stead while they were away from the Kingdom. Compare Isaiah 22:22 to Matthew 16:18-19. Jesus clearly established Peter as the Prime Minister of the Apostles, as was modeled by Davidic Kings. To be in communion with Peter’s authority is to be in communion with Christ.
Riiiiight. The same "Davidic Kingdom" which God did not even want to set up. It was only because of the lack of faith of the Israelites, who were demanding an earthly king, that God gave in.
So, compare the Roman sect all you want to the Davidic Kingdom, but you're comparing it to something ungodly, something God did not want.
Jesus did not "clearly" establish Peter as King. Which every single patriarchate outside of Rome (even the non-Chalcedonian sects) never, ever recognized. If you have the balls, read Guettee's "The Papacy." The Truth will set you free.
Lane Cobble You lack charity, that’s a pity. It’s hard to have an argument with someone with such angst.
What does it matter that God didn’t want to originally set a king over Israel? He still did, and then promised that a King from David’s line would rule forever. That has come to pass. Jesus didn’t enter into history in a vacuum, He came into a time and place to fulfill and renew a Covenant with Israel. And He established His Kingdom, the Catholic Church, with the same structure of the Kingdom before Him, with a queen mother and a prime minister.
Orthodoxy, with its lack of central authority, cannot agree universally. Take contraception for instance. Some Orthodox condemn it, some say it’s okay. Any institution with a lack of clear authority will fall to division. Clearly the God of the Universe would not fail to establish a clear figure of authority in establishing His Church.
And I’ll read anything you throw my way, Christians don’t fear the truth.
What does it matter that God did not want to set a king over Israel? Seriously? You're asking "what does it matter what God wanted?" Wow. Enuf said. You clearly don't understand that God's Will is best.
You think Romanists "agree universally." Then you are lying to yourself, lost in delusion. I know, because I was Catholic once. The Orthodox all have the original Creed. Catholics don't. Period.
He did establish an Authority. Christ, who is The Rock. The Apostles, who are the stones built upon that Rock. Upon the Rock of Christ as Lord, which Peter proclaimed. His declaration of faith was the "Rock" which Christ said He would build His Church upon.
Christ did not say: "Your name is Peter and upon YOU I will build my Church." Christ said: "Your name is Peter and upon this rock (the declaration of faith you just stated), I will build my Church."
Ok, if you say you have the courage, then read Guetee's "The Papacy."
Here it is:
There was NO man on earth more Catholic than Réné-Francois Guettée.
orthodoxinfo.com/inquirers/Guettee_ThePapacy.pdf
Obviously what God wants matters most. I was asking why it mattered when He still set a king over Israel. The various kings' behavior showed why God was sorrowful that Israel asked for a king, but salvation history continued on in the context of a kingdom. God's original wish doesn't nullify that. He wanted to be their King, and he used their misguided wish to end up as their King, so your shrugging off of the Davidic kingdom means nothing. It was a stepping stone in God's plan.
Catholics do agree universally. Provide some evidence of what you think we disagree on. "Being Catholic once" doesn't mean much.
Jesus changed Simon's name to Peter, which is rock. In Aramaic it would have sounded something like, "You are Rock, and on this Rock I build my Church." Of course, Christ is the cornerstone. All of Peter's authority comes from Christ, he is merely a minister of the one true Lord and King. When Christ returns, the Papacy will be void because its task of guiding the Church will be finished. The fact that the preface of the book you linked me misconstrues the Papacy as if it competes with Christ tells me all I need to know about the content of the book itself. I'll keep skimming to see if it has any redeeming qualities.
In the mean time, read the prophecy of Daniel in Daniel 7. The last beast, the one overcome by the coming of the Christ, is Rome. Is it any wonder then that the seat of authority for Christ's Church is in Rome, the capital of the beast destroyed by Christ? It seems to me that you don't truly know Catholic doctrine and are shadowboxing with misconceptions, much like Protestants do, may God bless them and have them return to full communion.
Horrible sound balancing, could not finish it. Fix it in the future recording. Otherwise don't even bother!
It is ridiculous revisionism to assert that the American Civil War was fought over any issue more important than that of slavery. This was the raison d'etre of the Southern plantation class. The "states rights" so commonly cited as the true issue of the Civil War by historical revisionists, usually of the Lost Cause variety, is precisely the right of these states to not only practice slavery, but to expand it across the entire American hemisphere. Dr. Jones does little to help his cause by tying his argument to these specious claims.
Yeah, the American Civil War is a big weakness of Dr. Jones's arguments. I don't know why so many traditional Catholics are inclined to act like either side in the ACW had some massive moral superiority. But the South broke apart families to expand capital. How is that moral?
This guy is mad.
So you're posting again after deleting your other post because it got so many negative comments? Pretty lame.