Jay Dyer Vs. CriticalThomist HEATED Debate (ft. SIIIG)

Поділитися
Вставка
  • Опубліковано 5 лют 2025
  • To be clear, I have tremendous respect for both of these guys and the work they do.
    Please subscribe to ALL of these guys’ channels, they truly deserve it.
    Credit to Jay Dyer
    / jaydyer
    Credit to CriticalThomist (Sy)
    / @veritasontheology
    Credit to SIIG
    / @siiig1
    www.youtube.co...

КОМЕНТАРІ • 91

  • @albohnayen
    @albohnayen  7 місяців тому +29

    For anyone who isn’t familiar, SIIG is CriticalThomist’s friend and they both regularly have discussions at Speaker’s Corner. SIIG is neutral between Orthodoxy and Catholicism.

    • @GarrettDaun
      @GarrettDaun 24 дні тому +1

      What does neutral mean in that context? Only one can be the true church.

    • @WarThunderers
      @WarThunderers 11 днів тому

      @@GarrettDaun SIIG grifts his catholic audience into thinking he is neutral. In reality, he is a catechumen in the Orthodox Church, and helps run a 'Orthodox' discord server with Anandaapologetics. The problem however, is that despite being a catechumen in the Orthodox church, he still teaches Augustinian original guilt, which is rejected by the Orthodox Church.

  • @Osten714
    @Osten714 2 місяці тому +28

    Thomist: you fat racist
    Jay: I’m not even fat
    😂

  • @chris6385
    @chris6385 7 місяців тому +73

    What’s cracking me up is that Jay Dyer is mimicking a Jamaican accent and CT is not even Jamaican😭

    • @andys3035
      @andys3035 7 місяців тому +18

      It was still funny though 😅

    • @olubunmiolumuyiwa
      @olubunmiolumuyiwa 7 місяців тому +18

      Lol as a Londoner I get why he did a Jamaican accent, because a lot of us speak with accents and slang similar to Jamaican accent and slang.

    • @UncensoredChristian
      @UncensoredChristian 2 місяці тому

      To be fair ChriticalThomist said "Church fadders"

  • @lolsing2205
    @lolsing2205 7 місяців тому +68

    stop referring to scripture lol

  • @olubunmiolumuyiwa
    @olubunmiolumuyiwa 7 місяців тому +54

    Yea, the second Critical Thomist said that God's glory is identified with His essence, then said that God's glory (essence) can be manifested/communicated to CREATURES, he lost. When Jay holds him accountable to this and asks whether God's Glory in Leviticus 9 was a worshipped creature, Critical Thomist said "No". That was his first contradiction.
    So Critical Thomist has only 2 paths to go down if he says that God's Glory is identical to His essence:
    - God's Glory/essence appeared in time and space and was worshiped.
    This would mean that God's glory is finite and subject to creation. Blasphemy.
    - God's Glory/Essense was manifested/communicated to CREATURES.
    This would be that a creature literally shared in or became God's essence (since glory = essence)
    or
    A creature of God become worshipped as God himself.
    Either of these is Blasphemy.
    Then Jay tries to bring the debate to scripture, Critical Thomist says he can, then when Jay tries to, Critical Thomist says literally, "Stop referring to scripture."
    This was a clear win for Jay. Though him making fun of Critical Thomist's accent definately rubs people the wrong way and can make people choose to reject Jay's argument.

    • @willyb7353
      @willyb7353 6 місяців тому

      Eh, right is right. No matter the character, people will say what they will.

    • @olubunmiolumuyiwa
      @olubunmiolumuyiwa 6 місяців тому +5

      @@willyb7353 right is right. But if people's hearts are hardened, right doesn't matter; having eyes they won't see because they're being made blind with offense and anger.

    • @willyb7353
      @willyb7353 6 місяців тому +1

      @@olubunmiolumuyiwa
      Well, you're right.

    • @elijahthomas1951
      @elijahthomas1951 6 місяців тому +5

      Thanks for the explanation. So essentially, by arguing that God’s essence can be communicated to creatures, CriticalThomist is arguing that creatures can (and have from the example of God’s glory being given to an angel) become a part of the Trinity?

    • @olubunmiolumuyiwa
      @olubunmiolumuyiwa 6 місяців тому +9

      @@elijahthomas1951 Yes. But CriticalThomist would never outright admit that is what he is saying/implying.
      Only Father, Son & Holy Spirit have the divine essence, as they are the only ones fully God by nature.
      However, the Orthodox Church has a distinction between God's energies (works) and His essence. God's works/energies are according to what God's divine nature can do.
      This means Jay can can say God appeared in time and space through his divine action/energy. He can even say we are able to becomes gods by God's grace according to the level we participate in God's works/energies.
      CriticalThomist believes God's works/energies are the same as his essence, thus no such participation is possible.

  • @aquavitae3824
    @aquavitae3824 7 місяців тому +33

    I like Jay's british accent more than his jammacan accent, but both were used to good effect.

  • @perfectlambministry777.
    @perfectlambministry777. 7 місяців тому +57

    Jay Dyer won this.

    • @bambbambboyguy123
      @bambbambboyguy123 7 місяців тому +3

      No he didn’t your orthodox your going to agree with anything he says

    • @perfectlambministry777.
      @perfectlambministry777. 7 місяців тому +16

      @@bambbambboyguy123 That's not true. I think he won because I didn't find the thomist to be convincing.

    • @perfectlambministry777.
      @perfectlambministry777. 7 місяців тому +11

      @@bambbambboyguy123 Also, the thomist wasn't understanding the Orthodox position. I do agree Jay wasn't acting in good nature. But, again he wasn't understanding our position.

    • @bambbambboyguy123
      @bambbambboyguy123 7 місяців тому +5

      @@perfectlambministry777. he wouldn’t let him get his point across bro if you can’t notice the things in the conversation don’t know what to tell you

    • @bambbambboyguy123
      @bambbambboyguy123 7 місяців тому +3

      @@perfectlambministry777. couldn’t be convincing because you’re manipulated by dyer in the conversation

  • @kkr6es
    @kkr6es 7 місяців тому +42

    jay won but they both handled that poorly and immaturely

    • @slowboywhiteboardv4
      @slowboywhiteboardv4 7 місяців тому +32

      It's called "info-tainment." It's why The Dennis Miller show only had one season and Jerry Springer had 27. You can be informative and gain a following, but people want drama and indecency. 😅

    • @bambbambboyguy123
      @bambbambboyguy123 7 місяців тому +1

      No he didn’t

    • @kingcarson3888
      @kingcarson3888 7 місяців тому +3

      No he didn’t he constantly shifted the goal post in the debate.

    • @theelement6255
      @theelement6255 7 місяців тому

      Shut up, softy

    • @willyb7353
      @willyb7353 6 місяців тому

      ​@@slowboywhiteboardv4
      It's true

  • @SilouanAr
    @SilouanAr 7 місяців тому +24

    This is well edited

    • @nubRas10
      @nubRas10 7 місяців тому +1

      Yaaaassss

  • @tekzadok8413
    @tekzadok8413 6 місяців тому +9

    isaiah 42:8 "I am the LORD , that is My name; I will not give My glory to another, Nor My praise to graven images" - God himself, jay won

  • @Kirill.Knyazev
    @Kirill.Knyazev 6 місяців тому +11

    Opposition: F(ather) / ~(not)F. What is ~F? For one, ~F is S(on), but ~F =/=(not equal to) S. Why? Because, also, ~F is H(oly)S(pirit) (and, also, ~F =/= HS).
    Now, if you allow that ~F = S & HS, you are introducing something which doesn't exist:
    for S & HS is nothing without F. And S & HS have nothing in common, which F also doesn't have. F have everything which is S & HS, namely D(ivine)E(ssence) (and everything which is proper to DE, i.e. P(ower)s and E(nergie)s).
    That is why in Orthodoxy there are relations in T(rinity), but not relations of opposition.
    S is ~F, but S =/= ~F (no opposition)
    HS is ~F, but HS =/= ~F (no opposition)
    S is ~HS, but S =/= ~HS (no oppositoin)
    Because, while S is ~F, S & F is not nothing, but DE, which HS also shares.
    And also, opposites are destroyed when united. This is the basis of the Theological arguments of the Fathers. E.g. mortal and immortal can not be one nature, since the opposites destroyed when united - this is the part of the argument against the monophysites.
    Also, this is the crux of the latins, a paradox that they have accepted in their reasoning that destroys everything.
    On the one hand, that agree, that HS is not a creature, and have the same DE with F & S.
    On the other hand, they say, that F / S, and then (F / S) / HS. This deprives HS of DE which F & S share and makes Him a creature.
    This is a paradox of latin Theology, a contradiction.
    This is why they say, that glory of God is a creature, i.e. so called "Created Grace". This is a natural conclusion of bad Theology (i.e. Trinitology, since there is no other Theology, but only Trinitology).
    If we are talking about classical logic, then by accepting a paradox into your system of thoughts, you make it inconsistent.
    And in classical logic, contradictions entail everything, i.e. any possible conclusion can be drawn.
    This is why latins have popes in mosques praying towards Mecca.
    This is why latins have clown masses.
    This is why latins glorify Orthodox Saints, who said that latins are heretics, and pope is an antichrist.
    This is why latins accept blessings not only of gay individuals, but literally of "gay couples", saying that they are not a couple somehow at the same time.
    Etc. etc. etc.
    Everything comes from bad Theology.
    Anyway, Latins, you go read the Dialog between Orthodox and Barlaamite of St. Gregory Palama and his Triads and other works, who is recognized as a saint in your debased church. St. Gregory uses clear and orthodox logic to dismantle Latin unorthodox nonsense.
    [Post edited twice: two copy-paste error removed, one clearly missing negation(~) added. Pray for me, a sinner.]

    • @dustins382
      @dustins382 6 місяців тому

      Have you ever come across Dale Tuggy? He tries to use classical logic to disprove the Trinity. He's also writing a book with Dr Beau Branson so Dale might already be aware of some of your arguments.

    • @Kirill.Knyazev
      @Kirill.Knyazev 6 місяців тому +1

      ​@@dustins382, ​ ​ the only way he can pretend to do this is by confusing and abusing homonyms, as is *always* the case with bad Theology. (The most common case is to confuse nature and energy, and be "shocked" to realise that for Orthodox God is the name of one of the Energies.) And by rejecting the one true teaching of the Saints, one removes himself from participation in Truth and even any possibility of knowledge. Orthodox are not bound by classical logic, as we know it's limits and applicability. Any way, I would deem it almost impossible, that he says something unheard of before.

    • @Danielqu976
      @Danielqu976 6 місяців тому

      No, we believe in relations of opposition on the attributes of the primary substance, not energy by the way. Primary substance idiomata. But thomists think primary substance is relation in a secondary substance, which is ridiculous. And primary substance oppose themselves, which is tri theist.

  • @dustins382
    @dustins382 6 місяців тому +6

    Around 10:00 critical asks "can God appear to creation through His effects?" Which the question itself is begging the question, because the thing they are debating is if God coming into creation is an uncreated energy or a created effect.

  • @AppalachianLumberjack
    @AppalachianLumberjack 5 місяців тому +1

    Jay won but man he rlly looked bad doing it😅

  • @prophit267
    @prophit267 Місяць тому

    Congo Quinas don’t want ya scripcha bro

  • @milkshaki8628
    @milkshaki8628 7 місяців тому +2

    this doesn't sound like siiig at all?

    • @rigavitch
      @rigavitch 7 місяців тому +1

      I really doubt it is! SIIIG is totally Orthodox

    • @adriancontramundum
      @adriancontramundum 6 місяців тому +16

      jay is debating criticalthomist, siiig is reacting

  • @TheoVonKing
    @TheoVonKing 7 місяців тому +1

    Im Orthodox and i love all the brothers no matter what denomination

    • @Sk3p5ik
      @Sk3p5ik 7 місяців тому +15

      there exists no denominations of the body of our Lord, stop preaching ecumenism when you are Orthodox

    • @TheoVonKing
      @TheoVonKing 7 місяців тому +5

      @@Sk3p5ik true agreed 👍 💯

    • @Damascene749
      @Damascene749 6 місяців тому +4

      You can love them while recognizing they are in heresy and need to convert to Orthodoxy.
      Only orthodox can be called brethren as we are sons of God by adoption.

    • @jjdibiase2228
      @jjdibiase2228 6 місяців тому +1

      @@Damascene749according to who?

    • @spongebombisraelpants2562
      @spongebombisraelpants2562 6 місяців тому +1

      They arent brothers

  • @parkplaceproperties4818
    @parkplaceproperties4818 7 місяців тому +11

    I hope jay dyer calms down when he finishes going through puberty

    • @nubRas10
      @nubRas10 7 місяців тому +5

      So funny

    • @thatguy4810
      @thatguy4810 5 місяців тому

      He is barely 5ft tall

  • @AlienBigCat23
    @AlienBigCat23 7 місяців тому +2

    Wow.. both full of crap.

    • @willyb7353
      @willyb7353 6 місяців тому +19

      😂
      I don't understand it = It's BS

    • @AlienBigCat23
      @AlienBigCat23 6 місяців тому +2

      @@willyb7353 All totally irrelevant.. what's it like being in a cult? Do tell...

    • @willyb7353
      @willyb7353 6 місяців тому

      @@AlienBigCat23
      Politics, the party you don't like is a cult too, isn't it?

    • @willyb7353
      @willyb7353 6 місяців тому

      @@AlienBigCat23
      Cult 45? 😝 Idiots.

    • @GavrielBrown
      @GavrielBrown 6 місяців тому +16

      ​@@AlienBigCat23oh the everyone's Christianity is cringe except for my obscure personal modern interpretation of the scriptures