Thank you for watching the final part of our Christology series with His Beatitude Mar Meelis Zaia. We hope this journey through the theological intricacies of the Assyrian Church of the East has been enlightening and thought-provoking. We encourage you to share your thoughts and reflections on the topics discussed, especially on the concept of Qnuma and its role in our understanding of Christ's nature. Your insights are valuable to our community’s ongoing conversation about faith and theology. If you found this series informative and enriching, please consider subscribing to our channel for more content on the Assyrian Church, its history, and its doctrines. Your support helps us continue to provide educational and insightful content. 🔔 Stay Updated: For notifications on future videos and discussions, don't forget to turn on the bell icon. We look forward to seeing you in our next series!
Thank you your Beatitude. I pray that this helps to clarify the position of the Assyrian Church of the East so that further dialogue resulting in the unification of all Orthodoxy may one day occur, as I'm sure it is on the other side of eternity. Despite the differences in terminology, it is good to see that your beliefs are in line with Chalcedon as confessed by the Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox churches. When they say that God suffered or God died, they are speaking about the person of the Son of God who was able to do so because He became incarnate. Suffering and death of course is only something that happens bodily to a person, so the person of the Son of God experienced these things insofar as He was able to do so by taking on flesh and a human nature. I hope everyone sees that when you say God did not suffer or die, you are simply referencing the Divine Nature and not the person, since there is indeed only one person. Before this video, I always understood Qnuma as "an occurrence of a nature", meaning a very specific, individual occurrence of a nature. So, in the Son of God who became flesh we have two qnuma in the sense of two occurrences of a nature - a specific human nature belonging to the one person of Jesus Christ our Lord, and a specific divine nature belonging to the same one person. In other words, just another way of saying two natures in one person, but in a different language. It is unfortunate that the dialogue so quickly breaks down sometimes, and that the effort to sincerely understand is unable to occur. Not just with the specific beliefs of the respective churches, but what Nestorius (not his corrupt deacon) or Theodore actually believed now that we have a chance to more accurately look at records without the communication and language barriers of the past (at least what is left of the records we have). I appreciate the comparison with St. John Chrysostom, because he too was sent into exile for calling out the ungodly behaviour of Constantinople in the same way that Nestorius did! Chrysostom just got the long end of the stick by not being condemned for a Christological error. Thankfully, despite any misunderstanding or anathemas this side of heaven, the Orthodox understanding of salvation allows for correction and growth in eternity so long as the one in question never willingly rejected the truth while knowing better (the true definition of heresy).
1. “Nestorian” is a proud name in honor of the martyr for the faith of Theodore and Diodore. 2. “You can’t be an electrician and understand theology,” said the bishop. Let us answer in the words of Thomas of Marga: “Not every metropolitan is necessarily a teacher, just as not every teacher knows all the intricacies of disputes, or he did not happen to stand against all the false interpretations: to each his own. But in Saint Mar Babai success was revealed in everything: in the fight against heresy, in the interpretation of Scripture, and in the explanation of patristic writings through research and investigation in them”. (The Book of Governors. Chapter 28. P. 51-56.) 3. And let us continue with the words of Mar Babai: “An isolated essence (ʔūsīā ʔīḥīdaytā) one in number and existing in its singular self (mqaymā b-yāṯēh lḥōḏāytā) is called a qnōmā. It differs from many in that it accepts accidents (geḏšē), but is not united [with them]: among rational, created and free [creatures] these are [the accidents] of virtue, evil, knowledge or ignorance. As for non-rational ones, then among them [qnōmā takes on] various accidents in the fusion of opposites or in some other way. But they [i.e. accidents], as I said, apply only to made and created [beings]. The qnōmā is stable (qḇīʕā hū) in naturalness (ba-ḵyānāyūṯēh), subject to the species (ʔaḏšā) and nature that contains this qnōmā along with its other fellows, and differs from fellow (ḥāḇrāwhy) qnōmē by a special property (b-ḏīlāytā īḥīḏāytā) that it has in its parṣōpā: [the parṣōpā] of Gabriel is not [the parṣōpā of] Michael, and Peter is not Paul. At the same time, in each of the qnōmē, a common (gāwānāyā) nature is fully recognized, and it is comprehensible to the mind what this one nature is, containing the qnōmē in communion (b-ḡāwā): for example, human or other; the qnōmā does not contain a communion”. (Liber de Unione. Chapter 17) 4. And let us confirm with the words of Mar Īšō'yāhb III: “The parṣōpā, O brother, being incumbent on (ʔīṯ ʕlawhy) expressing the meaning (mēlṯā) of many differences, is the determinant of qnōmā. Its main strength is its ability to be transmitted and perceived. It is incumbent on expressing the meaning of many things, as I said. Qnōmā is incumbent only on expressing the meaning of naturalness (ḵyānāyūṯā): according to the isolation of its existence and the simplicity of its expression (meṯʔamrānūṯā), it exists (mḵattar) as a single, while it clearly contains the entire meaning of naturalness. It accepts neither perception nor transmission. How, with your stupid stubbornness, do you strive to bring [these words] that are so different in sound and meaning (sukkālā) to the same meaning (hyāyūṯā d-sukkālā)? If, as you think, the same meaning (mēlṯā da-hyāyūṯā) embraces (ḥaḇšā < √ḥbš) the parṣōpā and the qnōmā, and the qnōmā and the nature can also be embraced by the same meaning, greater than them, then by such an identification of names (hyāyūṯ šmāhē) you will be thrown into the cesspit of filth of notorious heretics! What do you care about the honourable name of the Orthodox and the unwavering supremacy of the Church of God when you are plotting crazy tricks and perversion of the faith?! Also, O brother, the delusion that has deceived you is nothing other than the speech of those who claim that among the Greeks “qnōmā” and “parṣōpā” are one and the same. Learn from the experts of the language: [in Greek] the qnōmā is called “ὑπόστασις”, that is [literally] “standing, establishment, state”, and the parṣōpā is called “πρόσωπον”, that is, “appearance, difference, sensory perception, the main essential designation” - these are the Greek words and their meanings”. (Īšō'yāhb III Patriarcha. Liber epistularum // CSCO. 12. Scriptores syri. 64. P. 135. Letter 7) 5. Thus, a qnōmā is a hypostasis - and nothing else. A hypostasis is ontological, a parṣōpā is intelligible. A hypostasis separately and really exists on its own; a parṣōpā is the sum of distinctive properties - it is not a personality, a person or a being!
@@alangeorge2754 yea until they hear about “qnoma” or what we think about Nestorius, Ephesus, Chalcedon, Theodore of mops, Cyril, etc. Then they become close minded
@@lcrio260 Rome does not affirm Saint Theodore of Mopsuestia I believe. They do affirm John of Antioch and recognize him as a saint, in which Theodore of Mopsuestia WAS A STUDENT OF.
@@AryaXVIIMorning! St. Theodore was St. John Chrysostom's(who I assume you mean by John Of Antioch) friend, St. Diodore Of Tarsus was their teacher, His Holiness John Of Antioch was the Patriarch of Antioch in the time of Patr. Nestorius.
2 wills. Mind is a property of nature(kyana), since Christ has 2 kyana, the human and divine kyana, their will be 2 minds and 2 wills. However, the Godhead is 1 mind, and 1 will, since their is only the divine kyana. Kyana’s don’t will things, persons do, Christ is 1 divine person that wills the divine and human kyana in harmony. Which is the answer to how a ton of idiotic Muslims say “OoOO sO if jEsUs hUmaN naTuRe wIlLs oNe tHiNg aNd dIvInE naTuRe wIlL aNotHer ThiNg” There quite literally is no difference between ACOE and EOC, despite them constantly bashing us and saying we believe in Hersey.
Revelation 1:18, “I am He who lives, and was dead, and behold, I am alive forevermore. Amen. And I have the keys of Hades and of Death.” It is the same One who Is Eternal…Who died in the flesh. There is no separation.. there is no distinction. The Coptic Orthodox Churches and their sister churches suffered the most at the hands of Islam.. yet we stuck to the language given to us in the Scriptures and preserved by the Fathers. “I AM He who lives, and was dead.”
Also, you claim that Anba Bishoy and others wrongfully attack your Christology based on misunderstandings. To tell you the truth my friend the Coptic Church was always the pioneer in church dialogue seeking the unity of the Churches just as Christ is One… especially under His Holiness Pope Shenouda & His Eminence Metropolitan Bishoy. His Eminence Metropolitan Bishoy rightfully spoke when he said you do not speak of true unity. Sure your analogy appears to be unified.. but now each act is done according to each nature? How can you then claim the true unity of Christ? Making a distinction Christ Himself does not make of Himself! “I AM the LIVING One, and was DEAD.”
@@KeeperoftheWaythere is not a distinction of the person of Christ, there is a distinction in the natures. When Christ was hungry, was this attributable to the divine nature? Christ, being God, hungered because He was fully human and hunger is an attribute of creation, not divinity.
3 three hours and I left more confused than anything. Yo7 telling when Jesus came to save humanity he ment to make so complicated for us to understand? Any device these days they make it people friendly and simple, but God had to go through all this to save us? You telling 2000 years of Christianity people follow and understand all this? This people split the church and complicated a simple message of peace for personal gains. This is sad!
Dear rayk8596, he didn’t complicate it, as matter of fact he explained it very well and it was very much needed to all of us. I hope you took advantage of this explanation.
O Bishop! You must lift the Anathama on St. Cyril if you want to escape the lake of fire. This is not a shame but an honour of great praise. Do the right thing. Confess Natural Indivisible Hypostatic Union. O Bishop! Just like your own soul and body are NATURALLY united so is Our Lord Jesus Christ. O Bishop! The heated iron rod is struck by the hammer in One Concrete Reality.
Your so called "St Cyril" was nothing but a jealous sick person. He could not bear to see St Nistor ascending to the position of patriarch of Constantinople, the greatest city at that time, who cares about Alexandria. look how shallow is the way you think how can you compare the Bishop to the Lord when saying "Bishop! Just like your own soul and body are NATURALLY united so is Our Lord Jesus Christ" So may be you or your ignorant Shanoda can rise after you die.
@@Eisho.G Good. This is worthy of great praise. When/where? Do you have a link? However, St. Cyril/Ecumenical Council of Ephesus taught the opposite of Theodore/Nestorius. You now need to do the right thing and set them aside. You can’t have it both ways. Choose. It’s not a shame but rather an honour of great praise when the Orthodox Faith is hailed. We openly acknowledge without shame and to our praise that Origen made errors and Arius was in heresy even though they are of the School of Alexandria. Why don’t you do the same with Theodore and Nestorius? No Fathers is infallible! No School is infallible! Do the right thing! This would be to your great praise!!!!
@@findlife7838 I'm not impressed brother. The EO, particularly the Greeks, are so full of themselves that they refuse to listen to our Christology and consistently accuse us of being Monophysites - I'm sure you felt annoyed by their misguided belief about our faith. Similarly, you behaved like them towards this brother, coming across as arrogant without even trying to hear his Christology. For instance, Bishop Mar Meelis Zaia has clearly stated that the Assyrian Church is willing to lift the anathema on St. Cyril, showing a willingness to come to a dialogue. He also described the Assyrian Church's Christology, which somehow aligns with the Dyophysite EO and Roman Catholic beliefs. I agree, Theodore of Mopsuestia and Nestorius are heretics, but we need to allow the Assyrian Church to explain which parts of their teachings they accept and reject. If the Assyrians don't align with us, then we have to politely reject their teachings, but everything must be done with the spirit of love.
@@yenenehw I mean this with sincere love, truth and charity. It’s praiseworthy to turn from any error and do what’s right before God by exalting the Orthodox Faith. In fact, we are all called to repent from sin. They are more than welcome to clarify their Christology, lift the Anathama and take the necessary steps to rectify and affirm their Orthodoxy although, listening to this Bishop I heard many things which are highly questionable for example, using the analogy of “oil and water” to mean a “thin separation”. This is clearly not acceptable Orthodox Christology.
Thank you for watching the final part of our Christology series with His Beatitude Mar Meelis Zaia. We hope this journey through the theological intricacies of the Assyrian Church of the East has been enlightening and thought-provoking.
We encourage you to share your thoughts and reflections on the topics discussed, especially on the concept of Qnuma and its role in our understanding of Christ's nature. Your insights are valuable to our community’s ongoing conversation about faith and theology.
If you found this series informative and enriching, please consider subscribing to our channel for more content on the Assyrian Church, its history, and its doctrines. Your support helps us continue to provide educational and insightful content.
🔔 Stay Updated:
For notifications on future videos and discussions, don't forget to turn on the bell icon. We look forward to seeing you in our next series!
Thank you your Beatitude. I pray that this helps to clarify the position of the Assyrian Church of the East so that further dialogue resulting in the unification of all Orthodoxy may one day occur, as I'm sure it is on the other side of eternity. Despite the differences in terminology, it is good to see that your beliefs are in line with Chalcedon as confessed by the Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox churches. When they say that God suffered or God died, they are speaking about the person of the Son of God who was able to do so because He became incarnate. Suffering and death of course is only something that happens bodily to a person, so the person of the Son of God experienced these things insofar as He was able to do so by taking on flesh and a human nature. I hope everyone sees that when you say God did not suffer or die, you are simply referencing the Divine Nature and not the person, since there is indeed only one person.
Before this video, I always understood Qnuma as "an occurrence of a nature", meaning a very specific, individual occurrence of a nature. So, in the Son of God who became flesh we have two qnuma in the sense of two occurrences of a nature - a specific human nature belonging to the one person of Jesus Christ our Lord, and a specific divine nature belonging to the same one person. In other words, just another way of saying two natures in one person, but in a different language.
It is unfortunate that the dialogue so quickly breaks down sometimes, and that the effort to sincerely understand is unable to occur. Not just with the specific beliefs of the respective churches, but what Nestorius (not his corrupt deacon) or Theodore actually believed now that we have a chance to more accurately look at records without the communication and language barriers of the past (at least what is left of the records we have). I appreciate the comparison with St. John Chrysostom, because he too was sent into exile for calling out the ungodly behaviour of Constantinople in the same way that Nestorius did! Chrysostom just got the long end of the stick by not being condemned for a Christological error. Thankfully, despite any misunderstanding or anathemas this side of heaven, the Orthodox understanding of salvation allows for correction and growth in eternity so long as the one in question never willingly rejected the truth while knowing better (the true definition of heresy).
الرب يحفظك ويحميك ويحرسك مار مليس نريد المزيد من المواعظ ❤❤❤❤❤❤❤
Thank You GOD Bless You 🙏🙏
1. “Nestorian” is a proud name in honor of the martyr for the faith of Theodore and Diodore.
2. “You can’t be an electrician and understand theology,” said the bishop. Let us answer in the words of Thomas of Marga: “Not every metropolitan is necessarily a teacher, just as not every teacher knows all the intricacies of disputes, or he did not happen to stand against all the false interpretations: to each his own. But in Saint Mar Babai success was revealed in everything: in the fight against heresy, in the interpretation of Scripture, and in the explanation of patristic writings through research and investigation in them”. (The Book of Governors. Chapter 28. P. 51-56.)
3. And let us continue with the words of Mar Babai: “An isolated essence (ʔūsīā ʔīḥīdaytā) one in number and existing in its singular self (mqaymā b-yāṯēh lḥōḏāytā) is called a qnōmā. It differs from many in that it accepts accidents (geḏšē), but is not united [with them]: among rational, created and free [creatures] these are [the accidents] of virtue, evil, knowledge or ignorance. As for non-rational ones, then among them [qnōmā takes on] various accidents in the fusion of opposites or in some other way. But they [i.e. accidents], as I said, apply only to made and created [beings]. The qnōmā is stable (qḇīʕā hū) in naturalness (ba-ḵyānāyūṯēh), subject to the species (ʔaḏšā) and nature that contains this qnōmā along with its other fellows, and differs from fellow (ḥāḇrāwhy) qnōmē by a special property (b-ḏīlāytā īḥīḏāytā) that it has in its parṣōpā: [the parṣōpā] of Gabriel is not [the parṣōpā of] Michael, and Peter is not Paul. At the same time, in each of the qnōmē, a common (gāwānāyā) nature is fully recognized, and it is comprehensible to the mind what this one nature is, containing the qnōmē in communion (b-ḡāwā): for example, human or other; the qnōmā does not contain a communion”. (Liber de Unione. Chapter 17)
4. And let us confirm with the words of Mar Īšō'yāhb III: “The parṣōpā, O brother, being incumbent on (ʔīṯ ʕlawhy) expressing the meaning (mēlṯā) of many differences, is the determinant of qnōmā. Its main strength is its ability to be transmitted and perceived. It is incumbent on expressing the meaning of many things, as I said. Qnōmā is incumbent only on expressing the meaning of naturalness (ḵyānāyūṯā): according to the isolation of its existence and the simplicity of its expression (meṯʔamrānūṯā), it exists (mḵattar) as a single, while it clearly contains the entire meaning of naturalness. It accepts neither perception nor transmission. How, with your stupid stubbornness, do you strive to bring [these words] that are so different in sound and meaning (sukkālā) to the same meaning (hyāyūṯā d-sukkālā)? If, as you think, the same meaning (mēlṯā da-hyāyūṯā) embraces (ḥaḇšā < √ḥbš) the parṣōpā and the qnōmā, and the qnōmā and the nature can also be embraced by the same meaning, greater than them, then by such an identification of names (hyāyūṯ šmāhē) you will be thrown into the cesspit of filth of notorious heretics! What do you care about the honourable name of the Orthodox and the unwavering supremacy of the Church of God when you are plotting crazy tricks and perversion of the faith?! Also, O brother, the delusion that has deceived you is nothing other than the speech of those who claim that among the Greeks “qnōmā” and “parṣōpā” are one and the same. Learn from the experts of the language: [in Greek] the qnōmā is called “ὑπόστασις”, that is [literally] “standing, establishment, state”, and the parṣōpā is called “πρόσωπον”, that is, “appearance, difference, sensory perception, the main essential designation” - these are the Greek words and their meanings”. (Īšō'yāhb III Patriarcha. Liber epistularum // CSCO. 12. Scriptores syri. 64. P. 135. Letter 7)
5. Thus, a qnōmā is a hypostasis - and nothing else. A hypostasis is ontological, a parṣōpā is intelligible. A hypostasis separately and really exists on its own; a parṣōpā is the sum of distinctive properties - it is not a personality, a person or a being!
May god forgive all churches for their split
What does the relationship look like between the Eastern Orthodox churches and the Assyrian church of the East?
Bad, EO refuses to reason with us
@@AryaXVIIwe have yearly dialogue with the Russian Orthodox church.
@@alangeorge2754 yea until they hear about “qnoma” or what we think about Nestorius, Ephesus, Chalcedon, Theodore of mops, Cyril, etc. Then they become close minded
I have a question on Theodores on Mopsuestia
What's your question?
@@Ggdivhjkjl does Rome affirm theodore also ? Or Just nestor
@@lcrio260 Rome does not affirm Saint Theodore of Mopsuestia I believe. They do affirm John of Antioch and recognize him as a saint, in which Theodore of Mopsuestia WAS A STUDENT OF.
@@AryaXVIIMorning! St. Theodore was St. John Chrysostom's(who I assume you mean by John Of Antioch) friend, St. Diodore Of Tarsus was their teacher, His Holiness John Of Antioch was the Patriarch of Antioch in the time of Patr. Nestorius.
@@anthonyp6055 I meant Chrysostom, I always mix up John of Antioch and John of Chrysostom . Nonetheless, thank you for the correction. Godbless
❤
Does the Assyrian Church believe in one will of Christ or two wills?
2 wills. Mind is a property of nature(kyana), since Christ has 2 kyana, the human and divine kyana, their will be 2 minds and 2 wills. However, the Godhead is 1 mind, and 1 will, since their is only the divine kyana.
Kyana’s don’t will things, persons do, Christ is 1 divine person that wills the divine and human kyana in harmony.
Which is the answer to how a ton of idiotic Muslims say “OoOO sO if jEsUs hUmaN naTuRe wIlLs oNe tHiNg aNd dIvInE naTuRe wIlL aNotHer ThiNg”
There quite literally is no difference between ACOE and EOC, despite them constantly bashing us and saying we believe in Hersey.
Revelation 1:18,
“I am He who lives, and was dead, and behold, I am alive forevermore. Amen. And I have the keys of Hades and of Death.”
It is the same One who Is Eternal…Who died in the flesh. There is no separation.. there is no distinction. The Coptic Orthodox Churches and their sister churches suffered the most at the hands of Islam.. yet we stuck to the language given to us in the Scriptures and preserved by the Fathers.
“I AM He who lives, and was dead.”
Also, you claim that Anba Bishoy and others wrongfully attack your Christology based on misunderstandings. To tell you the truth my friend the Coptic Church was always the pioneer in church dialogue seeking the unity of the Churches just as Christ is One… especially under His Holiness Pope Shenouda & His Eminence Metropolitan Bishoy.
His Eminence Metropolitan Bishoy rightfully spoke when he said you do not speak of true unity. Sure your analogy appears to be unified.. but now each act is done according to each nature? How can you then claim the true unity of Christ? Making a distinction Christ Himself does not make of Himself!
“I AM the LIVING One, and was DEAD.”
@@KeeperoftheWay Its a fact that each act is done according to each nature, can you say that humanity performed miracles?
@@KeeperoftheWaythere is not a distinction of the person of Christ, there is a distinction in the natures. When Christ was hungry, was this attributable to the divine nature? Christ, being God, hungered because He was fully human and hunger is an attribute of creation, not divinity.
3 three hours and I left more confused than anything. Yo7 telling when Jesus came to save humanity he ment to make so complicated for us to understand? Any device these days they make it people friendly and simple, but God had to go through all this to save us? You telling 2000 years of Christianity people follow and understand all this? This people split the church and complicated a simple message of peace for personal gains. This is sad!
Dear rayk8596, he didn’t complicate it, as matter of fact he explained it very well and it was very much needed to all of us. I hope you took advantage of this explanation.
O Bishop!
You must lift the Anathama on St. Cyril if you want to escape the lake of fire.
This is not a shame but an honour of great praise.
Do the right thing.
Confess Natural Indivisible Hypostatic Union.
O Bishop! Just like your own soul and body are NATURALLY united so is Our Lord Jesus Christ.
O Bishop! The heated iron rod is struck by the hammer in One Concrete Reality.
Your so called "St Cyril" was nothing but a jealous sick person. He could not bear to see St Nistor ascending to the position of patriarch of Constantinople, the greatest city at that time, who cares about Alexandria. look how shallow is the way you think how can you compare the Bishop to the Lord when saying "Bishop! Just like your own soul and body are NATURALLY united so is Our Lord Jesus Christ" So may be you or your ignorant Shanoda can rise after you die.
It's been removed years ago, you need to pay attention.
@@Eisho.G Good. This is worthy of great praise. When/where? Do you have a link?
However, St. Cyril/Ecumenical Council of Ephesus taught the opposite of Theodore/Nestorius.
You now need to do the right thing and set them aside. You can’t have it both ways. Choose.
It’s not a shame but rather an honour of great praise when the Orthodox Faith is hailed.
We openly acknowledge without shame and to our praise that Origen made errors and Arius was in heresy even though they are of the School of Alexandria. Why don’t you do the same with Theodore and Nestorius? No Fathers is infallible! No School is infallible!
Do the right thing! This would be to your great praise!!!!
@@findlife7838 I'm not impressed brother. The EO, particularly the Greeks, are so full of themselves that they refuse to listen to our Christology and consistently accuse us of being Monophysites - I'm sure you felt annoyed by their misguided belief about our faith. Similarly, you behaved like them towards this brother, coming across as arrogant without even trying to hear his Christology.
For instance, Bishop Mar Meelis Zaia has clearly stated that the Assyrian Church is willing to lift the anathema on St. Cyril, showing a willingness to come to a dialogue. He also described the Assyrian Church's Christology, which somehow aligns with the Dyophysite EO and Roman Catholic beliefs.
I agree, Theodore of Mopsuestia and Nestorius are heretics, but we need to allow the Assyrian Church to explain which parts of their teachings they accept and reject. If the Assyrians don't align with us, then we have to politely reject their teachings, but everything must be done with the spirit of love.
@@yenenehw I mean this with sincere love, truth and charity.
It’s praiseworthy to turn from any error and do what’s right before God by exalting the Orthodox Faith. In fact, we are all called to repent from sin.
They are more than welcome to clarify their Christology, lift the Anathama and take the necessary steps to rectify and affirm their Orthodoxy although, listening to this Bishop I heard many things which are highly questionable for example, using the analogy of “oil and water” to mean a “thin separation”. This is clearly not acceptable Orthodox Christology.