To Agen and the Lion's Den brothers, we extend our heartfelt gratitude and deep appreciation for your defense. Please disregard any accusations of quote mining, it is imperative that we cite pre-Chalcedonian Church Fathers who emphatically proclaimed the One Incarnate Nature of the Word. Through quoting numerous Church Fathers, I've successfully convinced the truth of our Christology to my co-workers who happen to be a Catholic and a couple of EO. If the EO possessed pre-Chalcedonian Church Fathers supporting their Christology, they would undoubtedly utilize them to hammer us hard vigorously - they would employ every available resource in their arsenal without hesitation. Ultimately, our citations are nothing but the exact teachings and beliefs upheld by the pre-Chalcedonian Church Fathers.
Spiritual warfare out here for real, stay prayed up guys!📿 Thank you Agen for all you have done & will continue to do for the Oriental Orthodox Church! All Glory to God ✝️
“They don’t know metaphysics” - Melkite hero, yet they can’t tell us the metaphysical category of the natures after the union, dawg it’s been 1400 years I want an actual response.
Thank you for doing this Agen and we are lucky to have you guys. For years, they have been misleading their viewers by presenting what we believe as what we don't believe and vice versa with little or no challenge.
@ApostolicOrthodoxy Where did you learn OO metaphysics? Can you provide any online resources? On another note, much thanks for defending our faith. From an Ethiopian Orthodox Christian.
@@emmanuelteshome2469 I would recommend st basils letters 210 and 214 and the 3 christological treatises of st cyril if you want to understand the christology and metaphysics of oriental orthodoxy as a beginner.
Since I started following this, I've learned the difference between EO and OO. When Damascus talked of "one composite hypostasis of God the Word," I assumed he was referring to our doctrine. I understand from you that he taught a change in the intrinsic hypostasis of the word of God. God bless you. You are always making me proud to be Orthodox.
Like when St. Cyril in the scholia says unlike natures unite in a composition? and then his entire corpus speaks on a union on the level of hypostasis?
@@savedemmanuelThe union is in Hypostases, you literally don’t teach this, you believe the principle of the union is in person not hypostases per chalcedon.
@@savedemmanuel "union is solely in the natures"... you're kidding right? The entire OO apologetic relies on the union being of 2 hypostases uniting into 1 hypostasis. I think a lot of you Chalcedonians just make up random stuff as you go. You aren't even trying to sound informed on these issues.
@@danielcutlac5987 “If, then, we speak of a union we are confessing a union of flesh animated with a rational soul and the Word, and those who speak of two natures are thinking thus also…” St Cyril btw
When we speak of Hypostases meaning “particular nature” in the context of Christology, we are doing this in the way of speaking in analogy. Agen mentioned this in the video. We get this from St. Basil were he makes an analogical statement to understand Ousia and Hypostasis > The distinction between ousia (οὐσία) and Hypostasis (ὑ πόστασις) is the same as that between __the general and the particular__
@@MountAthosandAquinas individuation of the essence in the Trinity. instantiation of the essence in the created world. Nature is a contronym, it either applies to the commonality of something or the individuality of something, and it is designated dependent on context.
To Agen and the Lion's Den brothers, we extend our heartfelt gratitude and deep appreciation for your defense. Please disregard any accusations of quote mining, it is imperative that we cite pre-Chalcedonian Church Fathers who emphatically proclaimed the One Incarnate Nature of the Word. Through quoting numerous Church Fathers, I've successfully convinced the truth of our Christology to my co-workers who happen to be a Catholic and a couple of EO. If the EO possessed pre-Chalcedonian Church Fathers supporting their Christology, they would undoubtedly utilize them to hammer us hard vigorously - they would employ every available resource in their arsenal without hesitation. Ultimately, our citations are nothing but the exact teachings and beliefs upheld by the pre-Chalcedonian Church Fathers.
Spiritual warfare out here for real, stay prayed up guys!📿 Thank you Agen for all you have done & will continue to do for the Oriental Orthodox Church! All Glory to God ✝️
“They don’t know metaphysics” - Melkite hero, yet they can’t tell us the metaphysical category of the natures after the union, dawg it’s been 1400 years I want an actual response.
Saliiib 🔥
Thank you for doing this Agen and we are lucky to have you guys. For years, they have been misleading their viewers by presenting what we believe as what we don't believe and vice versa with little or no challenge.
@ApostolicOrthodoxy Where did you learn OO metaphysics? Can you provide any online resources? On another note, much thanks for defending our faith. From an Ethiopian Orthodox Christian.
@@emmanuelteshome2469 I would recommend st basils letters 210 and 214 and the 3 christological treatises of st cyril if you want to understand the christology and metaphysics of oriental orthodoxy as a beginner.
Amazing material. The EO don't have a leg to stand on. Their development of enhypostatisation doesn't work. Thank you for revealing the truth.
God bless your service, may the intercessions of Baba Kyrillos I & VI keep you wise and faithful in the Lord.
Thank you! May the Lord bless you.
Hey Agent can i get the pawor point that you had today and before at part 1? please?
God bless you!
God bless!
Since I started following this, I've learned the difference between EO and OO. When Damascus talked of "one composite hypostasis of God the Word," I assumed he was referring to our doctrine. I understand from you that he taught a change in the intrinsic hypostasis of the word of God. God bless you. You are always making me proud to be Orthodox.
Great stuff, very informative. Thank you, keep 'em coming.
Love the intro 😍 thanks for playing it
Big Love from Ethiopia, keep up
Love the New intro 🔥
Glad you liked it.
It's from the Malankara Syrian Orthodox Church of India. Impressed.
Malayalam intro W
So are you saying we Can study Aristotle metaphysics and it won’t affect Orthodox understanding?
Yes
Beautiful intro!
God bless you, could you please make a video about St. Augustines christology?
Using the Scholia on the Incarnation to prove miaphysitism is the worst thing you can do
Like when St. Cyril in the scholia says unlike natures unite in a composition? and then his entire corpus speaks on a union on the level of hypostasis?
@@danielcutlac5987The union being in the hypostasis refutes the OO view that the union is solely in the natures
@@savedemmanuelThe union is in Hypostases, you literally don’t teach this, you believe the principle of the union is in person not hypostases per chalcedon.
@@savedemmanuel "union is solely in the natures"... you're kidding right? The entire OO apologetic relies on the union being of 2 hypostases uniting into 1 hypostasis. I think a lot of you Chalcedonians just make up random stuff as you go. You aren't even trying to sound informed on these issues.
@@danielcutlac5987 “If, then, we speak of a union we are confessing a union of flesh animated with a rational soul and the Word, and those who speak of two natures are thinking thus also…” St Cyril btw
If Nature (hypostases) is individual, then do OO all affirm 3 natures in the one Essence?
Nature and hypostasis is not the same thing
@ That’s my understanding as well. I must’ve misunderstood Agen.
When we speak of Hypostases meaning “particular nature” in the context of Christology, we are doing this in the way of speaking in analogy. Agen mentioned this in the video.
We get this from St. Basil were he makes an analogical statement to understand Ousia and Hypostasis
> The distinction between ousia (οὐσία) and Hypostasis (ὑ πόστασις) is the same as that between __the general and the particular__
@@danielcutlac5987 Right. So Hypostasis is the same as “essence+idiomata” correct?
@@MountAthosandAquinas individuation of the essence in the Trinity.
instantiation of the essence in the created world.
Nature is a contronym, it either applies to the commonality of something or the individuality of something, and it is designated dependent on context.