Fatima & Mysticism, Latin Theology & Epistemology, Reason, Logic & TAG -Fr Dcn Ananias & Jay Dyer
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 21 ก.ย. 2024
- Fda joins me to cover the issues relating to western theology, rationalism, scholasticism, heterodox ideas and more overlap with Fatima and mysticism in the West. His channel is here / @esorem
Next LIVE EVENT in Vegas June 22 here: www.eventbrite...
Send Superchats at any time here: streamlabs.com...
Get started with Bitcoin here: www.swanbitcoi...
The New Philosophy Course is here: marketplace.au...
Set up recurring Choq subscription with the discount code JAY44LIFE for 44% off now choq.com
Lore coffee is here: www.patristicf...
Orders for the Red Book are here: jaysanalysis.c...
Subscribe to my site here: jaysanalysis.c...
Follow me on R0kfin here: rokfin.com/jay...
when the stream starts with jay saying “we gonna be talking about philosophy , epistomology and logic 🫡😮💨👨🏿🏫
I was praying for God to help me with issues surrounding Fatima and boom it’s up. Thanks Jay, really appreciate it ☦️
Jay, you bring up a lot of compelling points, and you're very well educated, but I perceived you as being mean one time, so I'm going to throw all that in the trash and disregard what you have to say.
Thanks Jay and Fr Ananias 🤍
I wish I could make it to Montanika, sounds like a nice time ☦️
Christ is risen! 🕊️ God bless
Start @ 1:42 🙏🏼
thank you timestamp man
Appreciate it dude
Much obliged
Most people dont know this, but Father Deacon actually has three titles in his name. Father “Chad” Deacon Ananias
This was an awesome stream. Very insightful as I personally try to dive into theology, religion, logic and philosophy. Thanks man
Challenging but spiritually satisfying. Thank you Fr Dcn, thank you Jay!
The only opponent to give Jay trouble over the years has been the flowers and their argument from pollen... Heheh 😉
There are many, many different ways in which Fatima has been interpreted by Priests & Bishops of the Roman Church. I mean wildly different - so different in fact, that they might as well be different prophecies.
Adding to this is the confusion and mystery over the "third secret of Fatima", given in 1917, but only revealed in 2000. Many Roman Catholics do not believe this third secret has been revealed.
Even further of strange note, P. JPII stated in the early 80's that they did not reveal the third secret because they feared Russia "might make certain moves" if it was revealed. However, there is nothing within the supposed revealed "third secret" that was eventually revealed by Rome in 2000 that is of a geopolitical nature.
Even stranger, a long deceased Roman Priest who is, by Rome itself, admitted to have read the "third secret", is on publicly recorded audio stating that Russia would - get this - "bring salvation" in this "third secret". Rome publicly revealed this "third secret" less than a year after that certain Priest passed away, and yet there is nothing concerning Russia mentioned within the publicly revealed third secret document.
Even further complicating this "third secret" is that P. Benedict, prior to 2000 stated that the messages of Fstima are the same as Akita. For those who do not know, Akita is largely about apostasy within the Roman Church. Yet, when this "third secret" was revealed, there was nothing concerning apostasy mentioned.
There is also nothing within any of the supposed prophetic statements concerning Fatima about Russia becoming Roman Catholic. "In 1946, during a gathering of youth at Fátima, Sister Lucia (the seer) was asked by a young Russian girl, Natacha Derfelden, as to how the conversion of Russia would be accomplished. Sister Lucia responded that the conversion of Russia would come through the Eastern Orthodox Church".
It is, in fact, difficult for me to see how the "third secret" controversies does not make the RC church look bad.
* I certainly realize that the Roman Church has utilized Fatima as a geopolitical tool. Seemingly at odds with what the "third secret" actually says.
* It is difficult for me to see how a supposed prophecy ordered to be made public by 1960 by the directive of the Theotokos to the the seer, but which was delayed until 2000 for public release makes the Papacy look good. It makes it look extremely manipulative, even fearful of it's actual contents.
* It is difficult for me to see how the following is pro Roman Catholic, as said by the Priest who had read the 3rd Secret (mentioned above). "Russia is within the plan...Why? That would take me too far into the Papal Secrets as to why Russia and Kiev are involved. It is simply God's choice. He chose the Jews to bring his Son to the world, through them. I would not have have chosen the Russians or Kiev, the east, for salvation. But salvation is to come from the East". That was said in 1996. Strange with what is occuring in that area of the world now. Many RC's think the Papacy was waiting for him to pass away before publicly revealing the 3rd secret. They in fact only did so right after his passing.
* it is difficult for me to see how the statement "the two messages of Fatima and Akita are essentially the same" as being pro-Roman Catholic, as said by P. Benedict in 1988. Akita speaks of a coming great apostasy in Rome. The publicly revealed third secret in 2000 does not say a thing about apostasy.
* it is difficult for me to see how when P. JPII (a cardinal at that time) said in the 80's they did not reveal the secret for fear of Russia making certain moves, makes the RC look good. Considering there is nothing mentioning Russia, nor anything that is geopolitical within the publicly revealed third secret, this makes it look like the third secret is still hidden.
If I were RC, I would certainly hold that based on the above, the supposed third secret has not been actually revealed.
There are millions and millions of RC who criticize the RC for this, it has caused dissension and division within the Church. Again, it is hard for me to see how the controversy within RC on this subject makes the RC look good.
Also, everyone, calm down. This subject is interesting to me, that is all. I am not saying it should be believed. There are many, many, many reasons why it should not be (immaculate heart? Reparations? Nation-State consecrations?). The subject is interesting, that is all. One can learn about something without accepting it. For example, I have read Das Kapital, and noted it's interesting points. That does not make me a communist. I am not advocating for Orthodox to believe Fatima. I was Baptized Orthodox as an,infant. I am also not Western Rite Orthdox. I am simply noting the points I find interesting. Please take it easy, everyone.
Ostensibly, the claims about salvation coming from the Orthodox Church and the "Oriental Rite" are irreconcilable with what the Vatican has claimed about the contents of the secret. Like yourself, I have referenced the claims offered by Malachi Martin and John Haffert on the 3rd secret when posting on RC channels, and no one ever responds. (I am RC myself, so this has been an issue for me). In terms of reconciling these apparent contradictions, I came up with an admittedly tenuous interpretation, which is based on mere speculation. It goes something like this: Eastern Catholics consider themselves "Orthodox in communion with Rome," and their Divine Liturgy is "Oriental," i.e., Byzantine. Thus, if it is the "Orthodox Church" that will complete the conversion via the "Oriental" Rite, then it will be a Pope elected from one of these Eastern Catholic Churches using the Byzantine Liturgy. Moreover, if it were an Eastern Catholic cleric who was to complete the consecration/conversion, wouldn't it be especially fitting if said cleric were from the smallest of the Eastern Catholic Churches, the Russian Greek Catholic Church, which was abandoned by Rome for geopolitics, and persecuted by the Soviets and the ROC alike. As far as I know, I'm the only one to articulate this theory, and I am aware that it's not particularly good. Obviously; yet it's the only one that works if you put stock in the premises offered by Martin and Haffert.
@@Laj-t9k thanks for your post. And thanks for reading my long one! I hope I summarized the issues somewhat clearly - it is all from independent research - I am not RC. It is an interesting subject to me, stranger than any hollywood plot. Apparitions, Secrets, Geopolitics, World War, Apostasy, and of course..."Russia!"
From what I recall to have read, some think that "Salvation coming from the East" means that the West will essentially force Russia's hand into a third WW, then there will be billion(s)? that pass (including due to natural disasters) and after that, the west will arise into a newly invigorated Christianity, returning to it's roots - one that is Orthodox. I'm not even sure where I came across that, but that's what I seem to recall.
As far as the jurisdictional/Papal piece you mentioned, it is interesting, perhaps it can even be melded with the view I seem to recall reading before as noted above.
Gnosticism. There is no secret, just stick with the Bible and the Councils of the first millennia which will put you in line with Orthodox Christianity.
So it's essentially worthless.
@@George-ur8ow I have never read it stated that explicitly, but it's a logical conclusion given the implications of what many have claimed, including JPII in his address to those pilgrims at Fulda, Germany circa November 1980.
You killed it with this stream
Where’s Saint Jiub with those time stamps?
Amazing stream. I think we need a generation of intellectuals. And not the post modern liberals. But people who are orthodox, firm in the faith and relationship w our Lord, but who are not low tier and can make a good defense for the faith and destroy all these false teachings, religions etc. make being smart great again🫡
Converting from RC to Orthodoxy, the vast majority I knew did not have a basic apologetic as to why they were RC. It was a fall back to my parents or family was RC or that RC had the Eucharist. Any who did any study into RC always fell back on Fatima. Their rational-Mary appeared therefore RC is the true faith.
Looking forward to a review video. Jordan Peterson just posted a 15 minute video with Alex O’Connor about some topics. I’d love to see you review this interview!!! I see a lot of Christians in the comments agreeing with Alex too.
At 2:06:45, the Esphigmenou (pron. both "e" as in "pet") monastery is since 1973 occupied by Oldcalendarists and in schism with the Ecumenical Patriarchate and the rest of the Eastern Orthodox. The canonical monks in M. Athos call monks who are in schism ζηλωτές (pron. zeelotés), meaning zealots (but zealots without discernment (Romans 10:2)).
In M. Athos there are 20 monasteries (17 Greek, 1 Russian, 1 Serbian, 1 and 1 Bulgarian) and 12 sketes (9 Greek, 2 Romanian and 1 Bulgarian), there are also many individual cells.
I knew from the beginning prime wasn’t a real WR the moment it was revealed that he attended an OCA parish in Georgia. The OCA western rite only exists in Canada and not the United States.
Theres Knock, Ireland aswell another famous alleged apparition
A pronunciation correction at 1:24:35. πρόσωπον is pronounced prósopon and is the same word for person and face in Greek.
Excellent video as always!
Fatima is schizo cope, similar to Q. There are copes of all varieties in Rome, it's the cope capital, but those of the schizophrenic variety are some of the most potent.
Catholic Q
👑💕🙏👍
Far more impressed with Jay than the guest. Dude Deacon, stop pathologizing and strawmanning your imaginary opponents, stop discussing supposed logical proofs (there aint none for this, and you definitely aint Fermat), heuristics, and generalizations. and allow us to know your position with respect to a worthy opponent dealing w fundamental questions. If you are questioning existence of knowledge then deal with the actual issues. Do you believe the mere existence of form itself is impossible to prove? Etc.
You’re right, he hasn’t been on Jay’s show a hundred times before. So when he’s on this time, he should go back and do all of what he’s done dozens of times before so that random lazy TH-cam commenters are satiated.
Bravo
I think that most of Fr. Deacon's points were valid, 3specially in the larger context of their conversations, but he did fail to refute phenomenology and e istentialism, and merely claimed that they were false positions because they didn't jibe with his world view.
Lmao. It’s almost like you don’t understand what he’s saying.
The secondhand embarrassment from this comment....
@@Ortho_Clips So..., by your logic, somebody's statements cannot be properly critiqued except via first going through and reviewing all that was stated by such person in some large multitude of completely different and separate presentations in their past. wow.
Bravo.