One of the big problems for you is that St. Cyril uses the words you translate as “procession” and “progression/pour forth” synonymously. They are fundamentally the same thing. This can be seen from the reference from St. Cyril’s letter 55 which you show in this video at 22:16. So when St. Cyril says that the Spirit pours forth or progresses from the Father and Son in the Third Letter to Nestorius, that is to say that the Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son.
@@hackbounties114 bro are u a Chalcedonian? we reject Chalcedon bc it contradicts St Cyril and Ephesus. u guys act like Protestants who attack without knowledge. u cnt ignore that St Cyril anathematized 2 natures. Orientals do not believe in monophysitism they are miaphysites which St Cyril taught which u guys seem to contradict. Pope Leos tome sounds very Nestorian and contradicts St Cyril
The whole heretical creed of Theodore was condemned. And St. Cyril and Ephesus clearly affirmed the Filioque in the third letter to Nestorius and the explanation of the 12 chapters. St. Cyril of Alexandria’s Ninth Anathema and the Explanation given at the Council of Ephesus Anathematism 9. If anyone says that the One Lord Jesus Christ was glorified by the Spirit, using the power that came through Him as if it were foreign to Himself, and receiving from Him the power to work against unclean spirits and to accomplish divine signs for men, and does not rather say that the Spirit is His very own, through whom He also worked the divine signs, let him be anathema. Explanation 9. When the Only Begotten Word of God became man, He remained, even so, God, having absolutely all that the Father has with the sole exception of being the Father. He had as His very own the Holy Spirit which is from Him and within Him essentially and so He brought about divine signs, and even when He became man He remained God and accomplished miracles in His very own power through the Spirit. Those who say that He was glorified by the power of the Holy Spirit as a man like any one of us, or rather like one of the saints, but that He did not make use of His own power in a God-befitting manner, but instead used an external power and received His assumption to heaven from the Holy Spirit as a grace, then these rightly fall under the force of this anathematism.
Amen, our saintly father Saint Cyril affirms the faith of our fathers and the holy orthodox church, a belief in the monarchical holy trinity. Yes we believe in the Holy Spirit, who proceeds from the Father, and is worshipped with the Father and Son.
Hello Agen. I appreciate you helping refute the papist heresy, the Filioque being one of the most egregious innovations of the latins. Could you please provide an epistemic justification for your metaphysics? Thanks
Depends on what you mean by "your metaphysics". If you refer to our specific doctrine on the incarnation, the justification of that belief is in the fact that the Acts of the Apostles give us an example of infallibility through a magisterial consensus and The Ecumenical Council of Ephesus 431 dogmatizes the doctrine of a single nature in negation to counting two natures after the union fulfilling the epistemological criteria of any believer to submit to a teaching. As for a justification for metaphysics in general, we ground this in the person of Christ who is Wisdom Incarnate and St. Paul who tells us to not be cheated by secular philosophy but rather stand fast to Christ's philosophy and the tradition of God which Paul make known that we ought to keep via the epistles and oral tradition. Thus when the patristic authors in consensus lay out metaphysical truths, we are justified in affirming them as per the person of Christ and his Church which he gave total authority on this matter.
@@ApostolicOrthodoxy Thanks for your reply. In your response text, you made several presuppositions which you have not provided epistemic justification for: -That the acts of the apostles are infallible -That Ephesus, or any ecumenical council can provide infallible truth and should be adhered to -You presuppose that St Paul is infallible, and you also presuppose the biblical canon - You presuppose that the patristic consensus means that something is true. -You used the metaphysical word: "Nature" without providing justification of its meaning -You presuppose that the oral tradition and the written word (the Holy Bible) are infallible Could you please provide some epistemic justification for any of these presuppositions that you have made?
@@anyavalenty7148 Of course I made these presuppositions as I saw that you made the statements: " I appreciate you helping refute the papist heresy, the Filioque being one of the most egregious innovations of the latins" It seems as if as an Apostolic Christian you already affirm such things 🤔 I have no issue demonstrating all of this but I'd much rather do it towards someone who is genuinely curious and doesn't share these common beliefs who understands the concepts of "heresy" and ecclesiastical doctrinal innovation (be it an Atheist, Protestant, Non-Denom, Muslim etc.)
Hi my beloved Agen, I am waiting for your response to false claims of Jay Dyer and his likes against Oriental Orthodoxy part 2. And I think that every video they make against our faith shouldn't be left unanswered.
The Eastern Orthodox distinguish eternal manifestation from temporal manifestation. Eternal manifestation refers to the procession of the Holy Spirit from the Father through the Son that is the Holy Spirit is eternally manifested through the Son from the Father outside space and time while temporal refers to the Holy Spirit's procession in the sense of sending by the Father and the Son to the created order.
"To the same, who affirm that the Paraclete, which is from the Father, has its existence through the Son and from the Son, and who again propose as proof the phrase “the Spirit exists through the Son and from the Son.” In certain texts [of the Fathers], the phrase denotes the Spirit’s shining forth and manifestation. Indeed, the very Paraclete shines forth and is manifest eternally through the Son, in the same way that light shines forth and is manifest through the intermediary of the sun’s rays; it further denotes the bestowing, giving, and sending of the Spirit to us. It does not, however, mean that it subsists through the Son and from the Son, and that it receives its being through him and from him. For this would mean that the Spirit has the Son as cause and source (exactly as it has the Father), not to say that it has its cause and source more so from the Son than from the Father; for it is said that that from which existence is derived likewise is believed to enrich the source and to be the cause of being. To those who believe and say such things, we pronounce the above resolution and judgment, we cut them off from the membership of the Orthodox, and we banish them from the flock of the Church of God." - Synod of Blachernae (Eastern Orthodox, 1285), Canon 4 We distinguish the three modal processions in this one quote.
Regarding St. Cyril's response to Theodoret , and how St. Cyril interprets John 16:14 "He will declare what is mine...". Continuing the quote shown at 47 min: "The Holy Spirit proceeds from God and the Father, according to the word of the Saviour, but he is not foreign to the Son, for he has all things with the Father. And he himself taught this, saying about the Holy Spirit:(Quoting John 16) 'All that the Father has are mine. Therefore I said that he will take what is mine and declare it to you'." You often said in your video that this is all economic (in short, I know you were more detailed). However, if he were trying to address Theodoret, then appealing to economy would be pointless, since this is not the context of the objection of Theodoret. Therefore, I believe it is correct to interpret St. Cyril as explaining to Theodoret that the this is eternally from the Son, and that is why the quote ought to have continued. If he is against Theodoret, then he is for the Filioque. Furthermore, this reinforces the idea that John 16:13-15 is also a text that this taking and declaring is not merely economic, but is grounded in the eternal procession of the Spirit receiving the divinity from the Son because it is full interpretation of the anathema.
I'm not saying I would debate you, but would you be willing to have a catholic join you to debate a thesis like "did St. Cyril of Alexandria teach the filioque"? Because Filioque debates are often long and jump from father to father which is not always great when wanting to go into deeper depth...
To say the Spirit is of the Father is not considered wrong, and attacks a straw man if anything against the belief in the Filioque. The filioque teaches that both are right, and it strikes me as weak that you go on stressing this when it is an argument from silence.
God bless , when are you going to address jay dyer Part 2 accusation on oriental churches being heretic?, I think they got nothing to say anymore about us. They spent most of the time attacking assyrian church of the east but the title says refuting OO ironic.
So basically, the Monophysites bring nothing new to the table when it comes to the Filioque debate. By the way, I love how this Monophysite regurgitates the Photians' arguments and affirms their made-up doctrine of 'Eternal Manifestation,' yet he strawmans the Photians' beliefs of said doctrine. 10/10 for originality.
You're the heretic pretending to be Orthodox, since Orthodoxy by definition anathematizes all who speak of 2 natures after the union. This was revealed by the Holy Spirit at Ephesus 431, in the Conciliar Homilies of St Theodotus, the 3rd Letter of St Cyril to Nestorius, and in the writings of the saints surrounding the Council of Ephesus. Your staying in the Dyophysite heresy will not grant you the Holy Spirit which your sect does not have. Only your being baptized into the Apostolic Orthodox Church can grant you the Holy Spirit.
@@dioscoros Your "church" disappeared for 1,300 years under Muslim occupation. That's the working of God's wrath for rejecting Chalcedon, not the Holy Spirit.
@@hackbounties114 Rome has been sacked six times. And most of Byzantine empire countries were under Ottoman rule for many years. Constantinople was burned down by multiple groups of peole including Crusaders. It finally turned into Muslim city called Istanbul. That's the working of God's wrath for rejecting Ephesus, not the Holy Spirit.
@@hackbounties114 lol melekites are so foolish God preserved are church under muslim occupation...does that sound like his wrath that we weren't completely wiped out?? Your "church" is completely imperial and is not true Christianity learn humility, my friend for you sir have none.
@hackbounties114 nope, our Church is the only Church still around because your synagogues do not constitute churches. That's why everyone knows that our patriarchs of Alexandria and Antioch are the only legitimate ones.
One of the topics that definitely merits a longer video. Keep it up
God be with you and God bless your service for his Church.
nice work agen.
Also noticed the mic has been improved
One of the big problems for you is that St. Cyril uses the words you translate as “procession” and “progression/pour forth” synonymously. They are fundamentally the same thing. This can be seen from the reference from St. Cyril’s letter 55 which you show in this video at 22:16.
So when St. Cyril says that the Spirit pours forth or progresses from the Father and Son in the Third Letter to Nestorius, that is to say that the Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son.
This trash argument from dwongs book has been refuted
@ Yeah? Where?
@@p0ison_420What’s the refutation?
@@p0ison_420Crickets
God bless you. I am from Ethiopian Orthodox tewahido church
St Cyril is becoming one of my favorite Saints. glad to be inquiring Oriental Orthodoxy🙏🏽
Miaphysitism is a heresy.
@hackbounties114 whatever you say, Nestorius 😂
@@dioscoros Nestorius was condemned by OUR councils, including the ones that you schismatics reject.
@@dioscoros i thought u called me Nestorius💀 i was so confused
@@hackbounties114 bro are u a Chalcedonian? we reject Chalcedon bc it contradicts St Cyril and Ephesus. u guys act like Protestants who attack without knowledge.
u cnt ignore that St Cyril anathematized 2 natures.
Orientals do not believe in monophysitism they are miaphysites which St Cyril taught which u guys seem to contradict. Pope Leos tome sounds very Nestorian and contradicts St Cyril
The whole heretical creed of Theodore was condemned. And St. Cyril and Ephesus clearly affirmed the Filioque in the third letter to Nestorius and the explanation of the 12 chapters.
St. Cyril of Alexandria’s Ninth Anathema and the Explanation given at the Council of Ephesus
Anathematism 9. If anyone says that the One Lord Jesus Christ was glorified by the Spirit, using the power that came through Him as if it were foreign to Himself, and receiving from Him the power to work against unclean spirits and to accomplish divine signs for men, and does not rather say that the Spirit is His very own, through whom He also worked the divine signs, let him be anathema.
Explanation 9. When the Only Begotten Word of God became man, He remained, even so, God, having absolutely all that the Father has with the sole exception of being the Father. He had as His very own the Holy Spirit which is from Him and within Him essentially and so He brought about divine signs, and even when He became man He remained God and accomplished miracles in His very own power through the Spirit. Those who say that He was glorified by the power of the Holy Spirit as a man like any one of us, or rather like one of the saints, but that He did not make use of His own power in a God-befitting manner, but instead used an external power and received His assumption to heaven from the Holy Spirit as a grace, then these rightly fall under the force of this anathematism.
Ah yes 58 minutes not too long
It's pretty short tbh 😢
Great video 👏🏽👏🏽
wow what a wise young man ! 🔥
St Cyril did teach filioque.
Obviously
How is your use of that quote from St. Hilary not conceding the truth of the Filioque?
Amen, our saintly father Saint Cyril affirms the faith of our fathers and the holy orthodox church, a belief in the monarchical holy trinity. Yes we believe in the Holy Spirit, who proceeds from the Father, and is worshipped with the Father and Son.
Excellent job 👏
Hello Agen. I appreciate you helping refute the papist heresy, the Filioque being one of the most egregious innovations of the latins.
Could you please provide an epistemic justification for your metaphysics? Thanks
Brain rot
@@Kataphysin_ Nice argument
Depends on what you mean by "your metaphysics". If you refer to our specific doctrine on the incarnation, the justification of that belief is in the fact that the Acts of the Apostles give us an example of infallibility through a magisterial consensus and The Ecumenical Council of Ephesus 431 dogmatizes the doctrine of a single nature in negation to counting two natures after the union fulfilling the epistemological criteria of any believer to submit to a teaching.
As for a justification for metaphysics in general, we ground this in the person of Christ who is Wisdom Incarnate and St. Paul who tells us to not be cheated by secular philosophy but rather stand fast to Christ's philosophy and the tradition of God which Paul make known that we ought to keep via the epistles and oral tradition. Thus when the patristic authors in consensus lay out metaphysical truths, we are justified in affirming them as per the person of Christ and his Church which he gave total authority on this matter.
@@ApostolicOrthodoxy Thanks for your reply.
In your response text, you made several presuppositions which you have not provided epistemic justification for:
-That the acts of the apostles are infallible
-That Ephesus, or any ecumenical council can provide infallible truth and should be adhered to
-You presuppose that St Paul is infallible, and you also presuppose the biblical canon
- You presuppose that the patristic consensus means that something is true.
-You used the metaphysical word: "Nature" without providing justification of its meaning
-You presuppose that the oral tradition and the written word (the Holy Bible) are infallible
Could you please provide some epistemic justification for any of these presuppositions that you have made?
@@anyavalenty7148 Of course I made these presuppositions as I saw that you made the statements: " I appreciate you helping refute the papist heresy, the Filioque being one of the most egregious innovations of the latins" It seems as if as an Apostolic Christian you already affirm such things 🤔
I have no issue demonstrating all of this but I'd much rather do it towards someone who is genuinely curious and doesn't share these common beliefs who understands the concepts of "heresy" and ecclesiastical doctrinal innovation (be it an Atheist, Protestant, Non-Denom, Muslim etc.)
St. Cyril is doubling down on his Filioque position in his response to Theodoret, not denying it
Hi my beloved Agen, I am waiting for your response to false claims of Jay Dyer and his likes against Oriental Orthodoxy part 2. And I think that every video they make against our faith shouldn't be left unanswered.
Response soon brother!
You really think St. Augustine was the only Saint who taught the Filioque before Chalcedon? What about Saints Hilary, Ambrose, and Epiphanius?
The Eastern Orthodox distinguish eternal manifestation from temporal manifestation. Eternal manifestation refers to the procession of the Holy Spirit from the Father through the Son that is the Holy Spirit is eternally manifested through the Son from the Father outside space and time while temporal refers to the Holy Spirit's procession in the sense of sending by the Father and the Son to the created order.
"To the same, who affirm that the Paraclete, which is from the Father, has its existence through the Son and from the Son, and who again propose as proof the phrase “the Spirit exists through the Son and from the Son.” In certain texts [of the Fathers], the phrase denotes the Spirit’s shining forth and manifestation. Indeed, the very Paraclete shines forth and is manifest eternally through the Son, in the same way that light shines forth and is manifest through the intermediary of the sun’s rays; it further denotes the bestowing, giving, and sending of the Spirit to us. It does not, however, mean that it subsists through the Son and from the Son, and that it receives its being through him and from him. For this would mean that the Spirit has the Son as cause and source (exactly as it has the Father), not to say that it has its cause and source more so from the Son than from the Father; for it is said that that from which existence is derived likewise is believed to enrich the source and to be the cause of being. To those who believe and say such things, we pronounce the above resolution and judgment, we cut them off from the membership of the Orthodox, and we banish them from the flock of the Church of God."
- Synod of Blachernae (Eastern Orthodox, 1285), Canon 4
We distinguish the three modal processions in this one quote.
Regarding St. Cyril's response to Theodoret , and how St. Cyril interprets John 16:14 "He will declare what is mine...".
Continuing the quote shown at 47 min: "The Holy Spirit proceeds from God and the Father, according to the word of the Saviour, but he is not foreign to the Son, for he has all things with the Father. And he himself taught this, saying about the Holy Spirit:(Quoting John 16) 'All that the Father has are mine. Therefore I said that he will take what is mine and declare it to you'."
You often said in your video that this is all economic (in short, I know you were more detailed). However, if he were trying to address Theodoret, then appealing to economy would be pointless, since this is not the context of the objection of Theodoret. Therefore, I believe it is correct to interpret St. Cyril as explaining to Theodoret that the this is eternally from the Son, and that is why the quote ought to have continued. If he is against Theodoret, then he is for the Filioque.
Furthermore, this reinforces the idea that John 16:13-15 is also a text that this taking and declaring is not merely economic, but is grounded in the eternal procession of the Spirit receiving the divinity from the Son because it is full interpretation of the anathema.
Please watch next time before you comment 31:18 - 36:16 and 38:22 - 40:06
Отец рождает Сына и от Отца через Сына исходит Дух Святой до рождения Сына!
A Master's class is pneumatology. Well done.
Ur the best habibi
I'm not saying I would debate you, but would you be willing to have a catholic join you to debate a thesis like "did St. Cyril of Alexandria teach the filioque"? Because Filioque debates are often long and jump from father to father which is not always great when wanting to go into deeper depth...
To say the Spirit is of the Father is not considered wrong, and attacks a straw man if anything against the belief in the Filioque. The filioque teaches that both are right, and it strikes me as weak that you go on stressing this when it is an argument from silence.
That was not my argument.
Send me the slides
Everthing is in english damnnnn
God bless , when are you going to address jay dyer Part 2 accusation on oriental churches being heretic?, I think they got nothing to say anymore about us. They spent most of the time attacking assyrian church of the east but the title says refuting OO ironic.
We had a vote on dc whether he’d make the response part 2 or this, we voted this so I think the response would be next
Yurrr
First
absolute miaphysite W
Based Video, god bless
So basically, the Monophysites bring nothing new to the table when it comes to the Filioque debate.
By the way, I love how this Monophysite regurgitates the Photians' arguments and affirms their made-up doctrine of 'Eternal Manifestation,' yet he strawmans the Photians' beliefs of said doctrine.
10/10 for originality.
39:09
another banger
babe wake up! new coptic apologist out!
🔥
Thought this was gonna be a good video, then realized 20 seconds in it’s a heretic pretending to orthodox
You're the heretic pretending to be Orthodox, since Orthodoxy by definition anathematizes all who speak of 2 natures after the union. This was revealed by the Holy Spirit at Ephesus 431, in the Conciliar Homilies of St Theodotus, the 3rd Letter of St Cyril to Nestorius, and in the writings of the saints surrounding the Council of Ephesus. Your staying in the Dyophysite heresy will not grant you the Holy Spirit which your sect does not have. Only your being baptized into the Apostolic Orthodox Church can grant you the Holy Spirit.
@@dioscoros Your "church" disappeared for 1,300 years under Muslim occupation. That's the working of God's wrath for rejecting Chalcedon, not the Holy Spirit.
@@hackbounties114 Rome has been sacked six times. And most of Byzantine empire countries were under Ottoman rule for many years. Constantinople was burned down by multiple groups of peole including Crusaders. It finally turned into Muslim city called Istanbul. That's the working of God's wrath for rejecting Ephesus, not the Holy Spirit.
@@hackbounties114 lol melekites are so foolish God preserved are church under muslim occupation...does that sound like his wrath that we weren't completely wiped out?? Your "church" is completely imperial and is not true Christianity learn humility, my friend for you sir have none.
@hackbounties114 nope, our Church is the only Church still around because your synagogues do not constitute churches. That's why everyone knows that our patriarchs of Alexandria and Antioch are the only legitimate ones.
First comment! accept my friend request bc im first comment or else😡
(Im BEHE)
No your not
@@Miaphysite_Carsinyu hu
First