3:45 When you understand this "technical issue" of "many men" that Saint Gregory brings up, then the injunction to *love your neighbor as yourself* including your enemies, isn't understood as something sentimental, but ontological. "Heal the human essence by caring for other human hypostases", to put it roughly
0:58 Is Trinity logically consistent? 2:02 1 God, 3 Persons, but not 3 Gods? 4:25 Different Persons have Different Wills 6:09 How do you comprehend God? 8:32 The 3 are acting differently, while doing the same thing, but how are they 1? 14:56 Distinct & Share Divine Characteristics
@@Cobruh_Commander Yeah no, they have content where they defend Arius and accuse Athanasius of being the lier and among other things the usual BS that Constantine "Made Up the Trinity"
the oldest view of early Christianity was a sort of binitarian subordinationism where the Father is the unknowable essence, a deus otiosus, and His logos the summation of all energies. Arius' model was actually more conservative than the innovations that St Athanasius defended. The reality is we are dealing with a mystery beyond comprehension so language will ultimately fail to contain the mystery.
@@neophyteone712 Wrong, don't try to hide your heresy behind "Oh, it's just a mystery." Early Christianity was and is Trinitarian through and through. It's YOU and Arius who are bringing the innovations from pagan philosophical speculation.
@@Cobruh_Commander My question would be how far back did you read? The Jews already had a concept of two gods in the time of Jesus, El Elyon and Yahweh/Logos. You can trace a straight line from Philo to Justin Martyr to Arius. But I'll put the burden of proof on you, where do you find the trinity in terms of co-equality among hypostasis withing the first 150 to 200 years?
I don't know if humans are divided in essence, as you seemed to say--maybe I misunderstood. I think St Gregory's main argument was that there is One God, not so much due to the single essence because humans, too, have a single essence, but rather because there is unity in will/energies, something totally different from the human situation.
my understanding is , human essence as the potentials of all different humans is not equal from person to person , is enhypostasised not only by difference in potential but also by internal will (even 2 person doing exaclty the same thing may do it for different reasons). now a "god essence" can only have the fullness of it, otherwise is not god. and because it begins with the father, is one completely equal essence as potential, with completely the same will and acts, but not as modalism. the only analogy that i can think is : three minds with the exact same body lets call them A,B,C. u can talk with any of them and they all seem to differentiate themselves but the B,C minds are in that body to act out the will of A
Very good presentation. I don’t know if you have read William Craig’s papers arguing that the Holy Trinity as it was formulated by the Early Church Fathers (Monarchia of the Father etc.) leads to a subordinate Son, Who is not equal to the Father. Any comment on these papers and Craig’s proposed model for the Trinity? Me personally, I don’t follow his arguments, but these are published papers....
There is a subordination of the Son to the Father in a sense which is consistent with all the early Ante-Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, this is not to be understood however as an an ontological form of Arian subordinatation where the Father and Son share a totally different or merely “similar” ousia. William Lane Craig opting for the Tritheism of John Philoponus isn’t going to solve anything and it leads to more problems than it solves.
I had a thought about another way to describe this when arguing against Islamic definitions. If Islam were correct, than there is no “Omnipotent God” on a plenipotent god, for to “plenipotent” means there is AT LEAST one thing an otherwise nearly all powerful being CANNOT do, and in their case, that limitation would be “To Have a Son”. But the TRUE God IS, IS ALL POWERFUL, IS Omnipotent.... As One Whole God. Put each PERSON of The Blessed Trinity, is Plenipotent relative to being a separate person, and are Omnipotent Together. Neither Christ (nor the Spirit) knows when He Is to return, only the Father Knows. The One God knows all, but the Father had ONE Secret from the Other Persons. Christ alone can be Incarcerate and therefore also die and be Resurrected, the Father And Spirit cannot do this. The Spirit has no Form, the Father and Son DO have form. 3 Plenipotent Persons in one Omnipotent God.
Could someone explain how Jesus and Holy Spirit could be God even though they are caused? I am confused as to how they can be caused yet still be necessary not contingent?
Begotten and Breathed forth in Eternity not time. another thing is they are not created..God from God etc. at the end of the day this is totally beyond our comprehension but has been revealed to us.
Because they are begotten from eternity, ie there was never a moment in time that the Father, Son and Holy Spirit did not exist as one God. Eternally proceeding = existing eternally in a certain manner and relationship. Also, the three persons also have the same divine essence, will, activity and mind, so the three persons are all one God. It is on these qualities that St Gregory based his defense of the monotheism of the 3 persons.
The “abuse of language” justification is wrong-headed from the beginning. We're not talking about language realities so much as we're talking about ontological realities. That by which you are human is distinct from that by which you are individuated. That by which you are human may be communicated to many, which is why there can be potentially an infinite number of human beings. However, that by which you are individuated cannot be communicated to any but you. If that by which you are you is identical with that by which you are human, then there could be but one human. Thus, one's essence is distinct from one's existence. And if essence is distinct from existence, then we have a metaphysical composition, and all composition entails dependence and finitude. Moreover, your rebuttal eliminates polytheism, for if the gods of the Greeks and Romans had the same underlying nature (immortal human), then the Greeks and Romans were really monotheists (if their gods were restricted to human ones). Having an essence by participation is simply to instantiate one's essence, which makes multiplication possible. To have multiple instances of the apple essence is to have multiple apples. That's not a peculiarity with language; it is an ontological fact. And to have multiple instances of the God essence is to have multiple Gods. The essence is merely abstract, which means that it is a potency standing in need of instantiation as a metaphysical principle. If God's essence can be instantiated, even if eternally, it can only be so because it is insufficient in itself as an explanatory principle. It stands in need of its instantiation in order to be operative. However, if God's essence IS existence (that by which He is individuated), then as there can be only one human being if that by which one is human is that by which one is individuated, so there can only be one person of God in principle. For if there were more than one instance of God, then God would be a genus/species, essence/existence, act/potency complex and would thus stand in need of a more basic explanation of Himself. So, not only are we left with multiple Gods under Gregory's theory, we affirm composition in God which makes God a creature. Consequently, Gregory's Trinity is undiluted tritheism on the one hand, and a composite Godhead on the other. Both are rationally at odds with themselves.
@@andys3035 You'll have to be more specific. I can't assume to know what you mean by the question because I'd write an entire book trying to cover all the bases. And you know from our past interactions that I tend to get wordy. If you recall, I affirm divine simplicity (DS), so God isn't a composite of essence and existence. Indeed, He cannot be a composite of _anything_ because composition is characteristic of creation due to its entailment of dependence. God is known by us as Father because He creates. He is known as Son because He redeems. And He is known as Holy Spirit because He regenerates. He is one person who is myriad realities to us as the one who sustains us moment-by-moment in existence. For in Him we live and move and have our being.
@@davidcoleman5860 yes, please don't get too wordy. Lol. So the Father is begotten in your view. Are these manifestations temporal according to the oneness model? In other words, in modalism, the Father manifests and becomes the Son, so there are 2 simultaneous personal "realities" here. For the one person unitarian God to work, what happens to the 2nd person that results in the incarnation? Your position still ends up with 2 or even 3 simultaneous persons post incarnation because they aren't consecutive, so they end up temporal.
People who keep asking stupid questions after numerous times of correction deserve a harsh correction, what David did here was even much less scorn and mockery than they deserved.
That's religion for ya. If you disagree with their doctrines even slightly they mock, condemn, and excommunicate you, calling you a heretic. And they wonder why religion is declining in so many countries in the world. They wonder why scientific advancement was so slow for centuries and is only now picking up.
Hello Jesus is the Messiah The Son of God The Son of David The Son of man The man God has chosen to be his anointed king The man God will judge the world through The man God raised from the dead Jesus has a God There is no triune god in scripture Jesus said the Father is the only true God! John 17 3 And this is eternal life, that they know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom thou hast sent. -
the Church that gave us Scripture gave us the Trinity. As the N.T. in various places makes clear that the Son and the Holy Spirit are both Divine you're wrong on all counts. As the Son became man (he wasn't pretending), then as man He had a God.
In John 17:3 Jesus is not denying He is God. It all makes sense in the Trinity since the Father is God Jesus is God and the Holy Spirit is God so Jesus saying the only true God is the Father really isn’t an argument that Jesus is claiming not to be God. And as we know Jesus is submissive to the Father in his role (not his essence) as said in Philippians 2:5-7 and shown many times throughout the Bible. Also in John 8:58 Jesus claims to be God (I Am) from Exodus 3:14 and after He said that the Jews began to pick up stones. Another time in John 10:30 Jesus says I and the Father are one also hinting at the Trinity. An objection to John 10:30 may be John 17:22 where Jesus says He and His disciples are one. Now what Jesus means as in He and his disciples are one is that they’re one as a Church which is Christ’s body so basically Jesus is making a comparison here. The 3 persons all make up the Godhead just like his disciples make up the Church. Your welcome and please research the Trinity 🙏☦️
@@JesusIsOurLord-xk9zz Hello Thanks for responding It feels like you’re making the word only have no meaning Jesus calls the Father the only true God Yet somehow that allows someone else to be the true God too? Wouldn’t that be like me saying Jesus is the only messiah But that doesn’t mean someone else isn’t the messiah Doesn’t make any sense It’s very clear language The writers don’t talk about things like “essence” and “persons” Jesus has a God Who is his God? Could we exchange emails?
Trinitarianism does in fact lead to 3 gods if you believe God has 3 minds (centres of consciousness). That is Tritheism & heresy. If you hold to a Modalistic Economic Trinitarianism than you are safely a Monotheist. I stopped watching at your “response 1” because God does not = a nature. God is not a what, but a Who. Sorry but you are in major error.
Yup, that’s why the One God is the Father according to the holy Councils of Nicaea and Constantinople not an idiot false god who prays and talks to himself and kills himself as in the stupid madness of Sabellius.
![BLACK BAG - Official Trailer [HD] - Only in Theaters March 14](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/Du0Xp8WX_7I/mqdefault.jpg)
3:45 When you understand this "technical issue" of "many men" that Saint Gregory brings up, then the injunction to *love your neighbor as yourself* including your enemies, isn't understood as something sentimental, but ontological. "Heal the human essence by caring for other human hypostases", to put it roughly
It took me most of my life to understand this. You say you put it roughly but it’s spot on.
Sir, you just changed my way of thinking. God Bless you.
0:58 Is Trinity logically consistent?
2:02 1 God, 3 Persons, but not 3 Gods?
4:25 Different Persons have Different Wills
6:09 How do you comprehend God?
8:32 The 3 are acting differently, while doing the same thing, but how are they 1?
14:56 Distinct & Share Divine Characteristics
Its always the people that know very little about Orthodoxy to call the Trinity “polytheism”
I'd like to see how JW, 7DA's, Mormons and other heretics will attempt to say this isn't a valid defense of the Trinity.
I didn't realize that Seventh Day Adventists reject the Trinity, I thought they were just a bunch of vegans founded by an occultist.
@@Cobruh_Commander Yeah no, they have content where they defend Arius and accuse Athanasius of being the lier and among other things the usual BS that Constantine "Made Up the Trinity"
@@willtheperson7224 That sounds like some serious heresy. Where did the whole Constantine conspiracy theory come from anyway?
@@Cobruh_Commander To be honest I have no idea, but I imagine it involves some group of heretics at the time of 1st and 2nd Great Awakenings
@Dissonant Timbres That Archangel goofiness sounds a bit like the JW's, is there a connection?
This was extremely insightful and helpful. Thank you for this video. Keep up the awesome work. God bless you!
Let me guess, the Saracens wouldn't shut up?
the who?
@@n1a316 Muslims.
the oldest view of early Christianity was a sort of binitarian subordinationism where the Father is the unknowable essence, a deus otiosus, and His logos the summation of all energies. Arius' model was actually more conservative than the innovations that St Athanasius defended. The reality is we are dealing with a mystery beyond comprehension so language will ultimately fail to contain the mystery.
@@neophyteone712 Wrong, don't try to hide your heresy behind "Oh, it's just a mystery." Early Christianity was and is Trinitarian through and through. It's YOU and Arius who are bringing the innovations from pagan philosophical speculation.
@@Cobruh_Commander My question would be how far back did you read? The Jews already had a concept of two gods in the time of Jesus, El Elyon and Yahweh/Logos. You can trace a straight line from Philo to Justin Martyr to Arius. But I'll put the burden of proof on you, where do you find the trinity in terms of co-equality among hypostasis withing the first 150 to 200 years?
13:20 bookmark
Good video. Thanks. The comments are good reading.
I don't know if humans are divided in essence, as you seemed to say--maybe I misunderstood. I think St Gregory's main argument was that there is One God, not so much due to the single essence because humans, too, have a single essence, but rather because there is unity in will/energies, something totally different from the human situation.
my understanding is , human essence as the potentials of all different humans is not equal from person to person , is enhypostasised not only by difference in potential but also by internal will (even 2 person doing exaclty the same thing may do it for different reasons). now a "god essence" can only have the fullness of it, otherwise is not god. and because it begins with the father, is one completely equal essence as potential, with completely the same will and acts, but not as modalism. the only analogy that i can think is : three minds with the exact same body lets call them A,B,C. u can talk with any of them and they all seem to differentiate themselves but the B,C minds are in that body to act out the will of A
Very good presentation. I don’t know if you have read William Craig’s papers arguing that the Holy Trinity as it was formulated by the Early Church Fathers (Monarchia of the Father etc.) leads to a subordinate Son, Who is not equal to the Father. Any comment on these papers and Craig’s proposed model for the Trinity?
Me personally, I don’t follow his arguments, but these are published papers....
There is a subordination of the Son to the Father in a sense which is consistent with all the early Ante-Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, this is not to be understood however as an an ontological form of Arian subordinatation where the Father and Son share a totally different or merely “similar” ousia. William Lane Craig opting for the Tritheism of John Philoponus isn’t going to solve anything and it leads to more problems than it solves.
@@ML-xh9ds can you elaborate further on this please?
@@johnmanual7595 What do I need to elaborate further?
@@ML-xh9ds in what sense there is a subordination of the Son to the Father?
@@johnmanual7595 The fact that the Father begets the Son eternally and is the source of his full divinity.
I had a thought about another way to describe this when arguing against Islamic definitions.
If Islam were correct, than there is no “Omnipotent God” on a plenipotent god, for to “plenipotent” means there is AT LEAST one thing an otherwise nearly all powerful being CANNOT do, and in their case, that limitation would be “To Have a Son”.
But the TRUE God IS, IS ALL POWERFUL, IS Omnipotent....
As One Whole God.
Put each PERSON of The Blessed Trinity, is Plenipotent relative to being a separate person, and are Omnipotent Together.
Neither Christ (nor the Spirit) knows when He Is to return, only the Father Knows.
The One God knows all, but the Father had ONE Secret from the Other Persons.
Christ alone can be Incarcerate and therefore also die and be Resurrected, the Father And Spirit cannot do this.
The Spirit has no Form, the Father and Son DO have form. 3
Plenipotent Persons in one Omnipotent God.
Could someone explain how Jesus and Holy Spirit could be God even though they are caused? I am confused as to how they can be caused yet still be necessary not contingent?
Begotten and Breathed forth in Eternity not time. another thing is they are not created..God from God etc. at the end of the day this is totally beyond our comprehension but has been revealed to us.
Because they are begotten from eternity, ie there was never a moment in time that the Father, Son and Holy Spirit did not exist as one God. Eternally proceeding = existing eternally in a certain manner and relationship. Also, the three persons also have the same divine essence, will, activity and mind, so the three persons are all one God. It is on these qualities that St Gregory based his defense of the monotheism of the 3 persons.
The “abuse of language” justification is wrong-headed from the beginning. We're not talking about language realities so much as we're talking about ontological realities. That by which you are human is distinct from that by which you are individuated. That by which you are human may be communicated to many, which is why there can be potentially an infinite number of human beings. However, that by which you are individuated cannot be communicated to any but you. If that by which you are you is identical with that by which you are human, then there could be but one human. Thus, one's essence is distinct from one's existence. And if essence is distinct from existence, then we have a metaphysical composition, and all composition entails dependence and finitude.
Moreover, your rebuttal eliminates polytheism, for if the gods of the Greeks and Romans had the same underlying nature (immortal human), then the Greeks and Romans were really monotheists (if their gods were restricted to human ones). Having an essence by participation is simply to instantiate one's essence, which makes multiplication possible. To have multiple instances of the apple essence is to have multiple apples. That's not a peculiarity with language; it is an ontological fact. And to have multiple instances of the God essence is to have multiple Gods. The essence is merely abstract, which means that it is a potency standing in need of instantiation as a metaphysical principle. If God's essence can be instantiated, even if eternally, it can only be so because it is insufficient in itself as an explanatory principle. It stands in need of its instantiation in order to be operative. However, if God's essence IS existence (that by which He is individuated), then as there can be only one human being if that by which one is human is that by which one is individuated, so there can only be one person of God in principle. For if there were more than one instance of God, then God would be a genus/species, essence/existence, act/potency complex and would thus stand in need of a more basic explanation of Himself. So, not only are we left with multiple Gods under Gregory's theory, we affirm composition in God which makes God a creature.
Consequently, Gregory's Trinity is undiluted tritheism on the one hand, and a composite Godhead on the other. Both are rationally at odds with themselves.
What are you doing here David?
@@andys3035 Hey, Andy. It popped up on the side screen for suggested videos, so I gave it a listen.
@@davidcoleman5860 How does all that in your OP work out in modalism?
@@andys3035 You'll have to be more specific. I can't assume to know what you mean by the question because I'd write an entire book trying to cover all the bases. And you know from our past interactions that I tend to get wordy. If you recall, I affirm divine simplicity (DS), so God isn't a composite of essence and existence. Indeed, He cannot be a composite of _anything_ because composition is characteristic of creation due to its entailment of dependence. God is known by us as Father because He creates. He is known as Son because He redeems. And He is known as Holy Spirit because He regenerates. He is one person who is myriad realities to us as the one who sustains us moment-by-moment in existence. For in Him we live and move and have our being.
@@davidcoleman5860 yes, please don't get too wordy. Lol. So the Father is begotten in your view. Are these manifestations temporal according to the oneness model? In other words, in modalism, the Father manifests and becomes the Son, so there are 2 simultaneous personal "realities" here. For the one person unitarian God to work, what happens to the 2nd person that results in the incarnation? Your position still ends up with 2 or even 3 simultaneous persons post incarnation because they aren't consecutive, so they end up temporal.
I can only assume that Owen Benjamin should be listening to this...but he is too puffed up with his own importance to hear this....
Yeah, the voice thing is cringe. It doesn't fit the subject.But thanks for the video!
great voice which fits the subject perfectly
It was going great until you started mocking the voices of those who have questions.
People who keep asking stupid questions after numerous times of correction deserve a harsh correction, what David did here was even much less scorn and mockery than they deserved.
Some questions are so stupid that they deserve to be mocked even worse than what Ser David did here.
Most people who ask these questions in the modern world don't ask them because they're actually curious. The information is available to them already.
You're right, people like Owen Benjamin who publicly claim that "the Trinity is gay" and has all his followers blindly accept this shouldn't be mocked
That's religion for ya. If you disagree with their doctrines even slightly they mock, condemn, and excommunicate you, calling you a heretic. And they wonder why religion is declining in so many countries in the world. They wonder why scientific advancement was so slow for centuries and is only now picking up.
Trinity dies not lead to three God's because begins with three God's already.
it really doesn't
Hello
Jesus is the Messiah
The Son of God
The Son of David
The Son of man
The man God has chosen to be his anointed king
The man God will judge the world through
The man God raised from the dead
Jesus has a God
There is no triune god in scripture
Jesus said the Father is the only true God!
John 17
3 And this is eternal life, that they know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom thou hast sent.
-
the Church that gave us Scripture gave us the Trinity. As the N.T. in various places makes clear that the Son and the Holy Spirit are both Divine you're wrong on all counts. As the Son became man (he wasn't pretending), then as man He had a God.
@@marcokite
To follow your logic
As a man, who was his God?
In John 17:3 Jesus is not denying He is God. It all makes sense in the Trinity since the Father is God Jesus is God and the Holy Spirit is God so Jesus saying the only true God is the Father really isn’t an argument that Jesus is claiming not to be God. And as we know Jesus is submissive to the Father in his role (not his essence) as said in Philippians 2:5-7 and shown many times throughout the Bible. Also in John 8:58 Jesus claims to be God (I Am) from Exodus 3:14 and after He said that the Jews began to pick up stones. Another time in John 10:30 Jesus says I and the Father are one also hinting at the Trinity. An objection to John 10:30 may be John 17:22 where Jesus says He and His disciples are one. Now what Jesus means as in He and his disciples are one is that they’re one as a Church which is Christ’s body so basically Jesus is making a comparison here. The 3 persons all make up the Godhead just like his disciples make up the Church. Your welcome and please research the Trinity 🙏☦️
@@JesusIsOurLord-xk9zz
Hello
Thanks for responding
It feels like you’re making the word only have no meaning
Jesus calls the Father the only true God
Yet somehow that allows someone else to be the true God too?
Wouldn’t that be like me saying Jesus is the only messiah
But that doesn’t mean someone else isn’t the messiah
Doesn’t make any sense
It’s very clear language
The writers don’t talk about things like “essence” and “persons”
Jesus has a God
Who is his God?
Could we exchange emails?
Trinitarianism does in fact lead to 3 gods if you believe God has 3 minds (centres of consciousness). That is Tritheism & heresy. If you hold to a Modalistic Economic Trinitarianism than you are safely a Monotheist.
I stopped watching at your “response 1” because God does not = a nature. God is not a what, but a Who. Sorry but you are in major error.
"Tell me you didnt watch the video without saying you didn't watch the video"
literally 12:30 would answer your question lol.
He who has ears to hear, let him hear.
Yup, that’s why the One God is the Father according to the holy Councils of Nicaea and Constantinople not an idiot false god who prays and talks to himself and kills himself as in the stupid madness of Sabellius.
Watch the video you coward