I appreciate the work, good solid stuff. Your content is a complimentary asset. One can always benefit from some more scholasticism in their life. The distinction between the Assent of Faith and the Reflexive Act / Science is so vital, it helps clarify faith qua 'obedience [of faith]' and is a helpful point recalling when speaking to those who say 'I'm having doubts,' 'not sure if I believe' etc. The post-Kant world is prompted to collapse the reflexive act and the direct intellectual act: a pelagianism, pragmaticism. Interesting, since he gave speculative philosophy (and hence spec. theology) the boot. This ousting of the indirect intellectual science ironically results in his speculative reason asserting itself over the agent intellect's grasp of self-evident first principles (pushing metaphysics aside, so he thinks, but rather replacing it with a bad/false metaphysics). Enter modern 'Epistemology'... boy oh boy, what a Kant (clever lad though).
Hey do you do debates/discussions? There's someone I respect that began to question the veracity of catholicism, claims he's open to be talked out of it. Would you find that productive?
Is everything that the Church definitively declared a first principle of faith ? Or are some of them conclusions that follow upon the supernatural principles of faith. So when it comes to the object of the supernatural virtue of faith, is the object of faith all the doctrines that the church declared definitively or only those definitive doctrines that are FIRST Supernatural PRINCIPLES.
The principles of faith are the articles of the Creed...everything the Church teaches is somehow contained or related to these articles. This is you can have dogmas of the faith that individuals don't explicitly affirm without destorying the virtue of faith.
What are those supernatural principles that one need to assent to in order to know that he has faith ?? The Dogmas ? Definitively declared doctrines ??
Can't, say, Muslims also say that their assent of faith to their Imam's judgement is infallible? How do we know our assent of faith is infallible while theirs isn't? 🤔
@@MilitantThomistThen wouldn't we be proving our assent of faith in a way that is unlike the first principles in the natural sciences (which are self-evident)?
What about Joseph Smith's translation of the Old and New Testaments? You know the one where, ol Joe added tons of words to the uncorrupted text of the Old Testament.
@@alisterrebelo9013 Yeah, read those too. Calling the OT text "uncorrupted" is ignorant at best. For centuries, it was a living document. Are you also upset about the changes Josiah made to the OT? That's a historical fact, not a "gotcha" or an opinion.
@@Misa_Susaki We have copies of the Torah/Tanakh from the dead sea scrolls, dating to 300BC. When did the Great Apostasy and corruption of scrolls occur? On what authority does Joseph '30-40 wives' Smith, add words to revelation that was given to prior prophets? Joseph in adding words to revelation is guilty of exactly what your church accuses Trinitarians of.
@@alisterrebelo9013 I'm not talking about corruption and apostasy, I'm just saying that the OT was a living document. The Josiah reforms happened in the 600s BC. The Bible talks about this 2 Kings 23. They find ancient scriptures under the temple, and Josiah wants to incorporate these into the faith because he realizes the Israelites have drifted from the faith. That's exactly what happened with Joseph. He recovered lost scriptures that had been written years before. Listen, do you believe that Joseph spoke with God? Probably not. Do I believe he spoke with God? YES! That is where he got his authority! From God.
I appreciate the work, good solid stuff. Your content is a complimentary asset. One can always benefit from some more scholasticism in their life. The distinction between the Assent of Faith and the Reflexive Act / Science is so vital, it helps clarify faith qua 'obedience [of faith]' and is a helpful point recalling when speaking to those who say 'I'm having doubts,' 'not sure if I believe' etc. The post-Kant world is prompted to collapse the reflexive act and the direct intellectual act: a pelagianism, pragmaticism. Interesting, since he gave speculative philosophy (and hence spec. theology) the boot. This ousting of the indirect intellectual science ironically results in his speculative reason asserting itself over the agent intellect's grasp of self-evident first principles (pushing metaphysics aside, so he thinks, but rather replacing it with a bad/false metaphysics). Enter modern 'Epistemology'... boy oh boy, what a Kant (clever lad though).
Thank you for your amazing videos Christian. You have helped so much in clarifying many issues and giving me strong foundation for my faith.
This guy is doing God's work,defending His Church,the true Ecclesia of Christ🇻🇦
Thank you!
I need more philosophical training to keep up ha ha this is awesome. Thanks for the content!
Understand absolutely nothing, but seems cool. I'm just starting my path in theology
Hoping I don’t fail the IQ minimum for this one!
Going to understand a Militant Thomist video at some point this year!
Easy to understand hard to pay attention
Hey Christian, do you plan on taking up a career in education or are you sticking to your online stuff? Your stuff’s impressive
More videos like the Augustine video!
Is Papacy/magisterium an article of faith?
love u wagne
Really appreciate this video.
I hope I am not in danger because I follow you 😂
This is what Christian B. Wagner would look like if the was a bit different in appearance.
Wagner, but AI generated
So true
What software were you using in 13:46?
I feel like this video is basically a prolegomena to all of your other videos.
So true!!!
Hey do you do debates/discussions? There's someone I respect that began to question the veracity of catholicism, claims he's open to be talked out of it.
Would you find that productive?
Is everything that the Church definitively declared a first principle of faith ? Or are some of them conclusions that follow upon the supernatural principles of faith. So when it comes to the object of the supernatural virtue of faith, is the object of faith all the doctrines that the church declared definitively or only those definitive doctrines that are FIRST Supernatural PRINCIPLES.
The principles of faith are the articles of the Creed...everything the Church teaches is somehow contained or related to these articles. This is you can have dogmas of the faith that individuals don't explicitly affirm without destorying the virtue of faith.
I like probable arguments.
They are very based
What are those supernatural principles that one need to assent to in order to know that he has faith ?? The Dogmas ? Definitively declared doctrines ??
The articles of faith, i.e., the Creed.
Brother are you considering the priesthood?
Pretty sure he's married lol
I am married
Priest of his family!
Can't, say, Muslims also say that their assent of faith to their Imam's judgement is infallible? How do we know our assent of faith is infallible while theirs isn't? 🤔
Reflection
@@MilitantThomistThen wouldn't we be proving our assent of faith in a way that is unlike the first principles in the natural sciences (which are self-evident)?
Read the Book of Mormon!
What about Joseph Smith's translation of the Old and New Testaments? You know the one where, ol Joe added tons of words to the uncorrupted text of the Old Testament.
@@alisterrebelo9013 Yeah, read those too.
Calling the OT text "uncorrupted" is ignorant at best. For centuries, it was a living document. Are you also upset about the changes Josiah made to the OT? That's a historical fact, not a "gotcha" or an opinion.
@@Misa_Susaki We have copies of the Torah/Tanakh from the dead sea scrolls, dating to 300BC. When did the Great Apostasy and corruption of scrolls occur?
On what authority does Joseph '30-40 wives' Smith, add words to revelation that was given to prior prophets? Joseph in adding words to revelation is guilty of exactly what your church accuses Trinitarians of.
@@alisterrebelo9013
I'm not talking about corruption and apostasy, I'm just saying that the OT was a living document. The Josiah reforms happened in the 600s BC. The Bible talks about this 2 Kings 23. They find ancient scriptures under the temple, and Josiah wants to incorporate these into the faith because he realizes the Israelites have drifted from the faith.
That's exactly what happened with Joseph. He recovered lost scriptures that had been written years before.
Listen, do you believe that Joseph spoke with God? Probably not. Do I believe he spoke with God? YES! That is where he got his authority! From God.