Видео

Hey Dwong, could you please explain to me who became incarnate in Roman Catholicism?

Call in

I just ordered it I told you I was your biggest fan🎊

Kerluke Turnpike

Anderson Fort

Dwong, I'm curious as to what your thoughts are on playing a game like GTA 6 (when it releases). On the one hand, it will 100% feature sexual content and other immoral activites, so that could pose a problem. On the other hand, if one exercises prudence and is not indulging in such content and ones intention in playing the game is not impure, would that still be problematic? Obviously, if it is a near occasion for a particular person, he ought to avoid it. But what if it isn't? Would the content itself be problematic, regardless of subjective circumstances?

Beatty Groves

Love the message man, I am very solid in spirituality and scrupulosity and your videos help. One request that would really help that though is you maybe refuting sedevacantism please… they’re the only ones that get me hung up nowadays. Love ya brother ✝️

Schmidt Viaduct

Wyman Plains

Naomi Center

Unique Hill

Kozey Crescent

Evelyn Flats

Gislason Views

Stan Landing

Bartell Prairie

W for Western Christianity. Thank you very much.

Schneider Fort

17:01 Saint Cyril wrote, “but the Spirit Himself of God and the Father, who proceedeth also from Him, and is not alien from the Son, according to His essence.” This is explicitly the EO position. I acknowledge it doesn’t disprove the RC position.

15:18 Saying the Spirit is consubstantial with the Son is the same as saying they share the same essence. Essence same as the Father. Essence they get from the Father. The essence is with the Father. The Father is not from the essence. St. Cyril says “through the Son,” maintains the EO position because the Father is the source of His Son and Spirit. From the Father they have essence. That essence isn’t lacking in any way between the Trinity. So of course the Spirit has what the Son has. Just as He comes from the Son, so too He comes from Himself. However, His source is the Father. He can’t be from both if He is through the Son. From the perspective of creation He may appear from Both, but beyond creation divinely simple He is from the Father. This is Saint Cyril’s position and contradicts Catholicism. Again it just seems, Saint Cyril isn’t defining the Catholic dogma. Instead, he’s proving the divinity and personhood of the Holy Spirit. Can’t we also affirm that the Son has all that the Spirit has because of their shared essence? Was Jesus not incarnate by the Spirit, being through Him from the Father? Can we say that beyond creation this is a hypostatic reality? No. Likewise, according to the witness of scripture, how can we confidently apply this logic to the Spirit? I don’t think we can. I might be wrong, of course. I’ve been wrong many times. Jesus, please, have mercy on me. It seems the Filioque position as dogmatically defined is contrary to the early fathers’ intent. Then Roman Catholics try to make it their intent. It doesn’t seem fair or edifying to a layman like myself. Trying to discern out of Protestantism, it seems everything hinges on this topic. As you can tell I’m leaning EO, but I’m trying to be diligent in my study of RC. Your channel is a great challenge. Its takes me what feels like forever to work through your videos, but it’s fun. Thanks.

7:54 Christ as the Lawgiver is enacting the law. This is Scripture, inspired by the Holy Spirit. By saying the Spirit naturally exists in and from Christ, affirms how the Son is also involved in work of giving creation His Law. Let’s not forget, though not mentioned, the Father is working in this too. Of course, we also have the Law of Christ written on our hearts by the Spirit. Maybe Saint Cyril is writing of this? Either way, because the topic is “giving the law,” doesn’t it imply temporal procession. If the Spirit exists in Christ, does that mean He’s contained within His person? That could be problematic. If I go through a mountain by digging a tunnel, at some point I am in the mountain. After I get through, I can claim that I am from that mountain. Why is “in and from” important to Saint Cyril? Couldn’t he have communicated “through?” It seems he doesn’t want to divide God when communicating His working. I don’t see EO having any issue with this quote. I don’t think it’s explicit in support of Catholicism’s claim. I think this is the best quote in support of your claim, thus far. I am curious what’s hiding in the paragraphs surrounding this single sentence. I’ll check the source. Isn’t it obvious Saint Cyril would’ve confessed the Nicene Creed as it was articulated at Constantinople, without the Filioque? If so, these writings won’t contradict that. Of course, he can build on whatever he wants in his personal writings. This may help lead to the western development, but asserting that Saint Cyril taught the Filioque, as dogmatically defined at Florence, is a stretch. If we hyper-focus on these quote mines, we miss what he is actually teaching us. I love how Saint Cyril is saying scripture is from Jesus.

7:15 The quote begins with clear context, referencing creation’s reception of the Spirit from the Son. It’s evident to the EO position that He does this by proceeding from the Father and the Son, or “through.” Saint Cyril writes, “He is of the divine substance, proceeding substantially in it and from it,” because the temporal reception of the Spirit proves that He is God from God, just like the incarnation proves Jesus is God from God. To say the Spirit is from divine substance, doesn’t mean He’s lacking it. Therefore, He proceeds from Himself in as much as He proceeds from the Father and Son. This doesn’t help us understand hypostatic properties. We are learning from Saint Cyril that the Holy Spirit is God. Was this not the work of the church after the 2nd Ecumenical Council? To convict the church in opposition to the Macedonians? I think our beloved Cyril is championing this for us in these texts. Praise God. I do think it’s interesting how Saint Cyril’s theology is related to Saint Athanasius. It’s fun to see the similarities and expansion of thought as the Church grows.

4:30 Saying the Spirit is from the essence of the Son is different than saying, from the Son. The Son’s essence is from the Father. Therefore, with the Father is divine essence. From Whom the Son and Spirit draw their eternal existence. Saint Cyril even said, “If this is so, then the Spirit is God from God, and not a creature.” The goal of Saint Cyril is to prove the Spirit is not a creature. As we confess He is “equal to the Father and Son,” the Father being “One God” and the Son is “True God of True God, of one essence with the Father.” This communicates the Son is from the Father as the same God. Therefore, Saint Cyril is relating the Son and Spirit in order to make them equals. Leading to the obvious conclusion that the Spirit is God from God, aka processed by the Father. We may imply that he is teaching the Filioque, but it can’t be claimed as if it’s explicit. Obviously, I have implied that he’s teaching the EO position. The reason the EO position has better weight given this specific quote is when Saint Cyril writes, “is sent by Him [the Son] into creation to enact renewal…” This understanding being anchored in scripture. Saint John the Apostle writes Jesus’ explanation how He sends His Spirit and when (Pentecost). All this being done relative to time as witnessed by the Church in Acts. Therefore, temporal. It can’t be definitively imputed into Ontology beyond creation as a hypostatic relation between them. I’ll keep watching… I love the icon of the of the church fathers right next to the text. It’s so helpful to put faces to names. Protestant’s need to get on board with that. Great teaching tools at the very least.

Praying that Catholic RUclipsr like Trent Horn, Voice of Resason and others showcase your book, this not only refute Orthodoxy, but all anti-trinitarian. 🙏🙏

White Melissa Jones Carol Williams Angela

Incredible work brother. I hope you can also make for Papal Primacy

Debate an orthodox christian. It would be interesting.

7:23 “Then again, we see yet another such light [Holy Spirit] after the same fashion sundered by no interval of time from that offspring Light [Son], and while shining forth by means It yet tracing the source of its being to the Primal Light [Father];” “After the same fashion” means “in every way like Him [Father], in beauty, in power, in luster, in size, in brilliance, in all things at once that we observe in the sun. “Sundered,” means split or distinct. “By no interval of time from the offspring Light [Son];” the Spirit is distinct by no interval of time from the Son. Then it says, “yet tracing the source of its being to the Primal Light [Father].” Therefore, the plain reading is, the Spirit is the likeness of the Son just as the Son is the likeness of His Father. Meaning, the Spirit is the same likeness of the Father. However, distinct from the Son and sourced from the Father under no bounds of time and uncreated. Isn’t this the EO position? Wasn’t Nyssa involved at the 2nd ecumenical council where the fathers articulated the procession of the Spirit from the Father? Again, it appears your interpretation is presupposed by a mind bound to Catholicism. Just like Calvinists change the plain reading of scripture to fit their system, you’re influencing your audience to read Gregory unfairly. My opinion. I’ll keep watching.

Bought the hard copy! Stoked to read it, though its so tall I had to reorient my bookshel to make it fit 🤣

Can you please make a Kindle version?

Finished reading!!! Made notes on it already. Epic book and helps me confirm my Catholic faith!

Incredible work man! Congrats on the amazing work

rabbi Tovia liar 🐷🤡 would get a stroke if he watched this video.

W mans

Tillman Expressway

Moen Ford

Brian: I have fwd this link to my co-host John Collorafi. He will be on LIVE this week on Fatima Friday (First Friday of September). He will be updating our listeners on The New "Christian" Russia.

I'm Orthodox but I'll read the book to see ur guys' perspective on the issue

I swear this is what happened in the Council of Ferrara-Florence (1431-1449).

I realised that I need a good confession. Thanks for the video. Also the comment section proves why most people won’t make it.

Great book

These videos are great but I think I absorb information better with reading, do you think you could post your notes in a discord or something for those who prefer to digest information through reading?

Hi Dwong, I thank the Lord & u for someone finally making a book that effectively supports the Filioque, but recently I was jus debating w/ a Protestant on the immaculate conception & unfortunately my claims fell short due to the lack of knowledge I have of it, & was thinking if u would know of any books that can help further deepen my understanding of the topic?

If one watches this they cannot deny the Filioque, great work!

Thank you for this video this has been extremely insightful has helped me with my daily struggle of keeping God first in my life. May God bless you.

Gonna buy and give it to my brother who is considering orthodoxy!!!

It looks amazing!

Masterpiece (I haven't read it yet)

Amazing! Thank you for the free pdf 🙏